CNN’s Canard About Wright’s Chickens Line

This article was posted by Steve Gilbert on Saturday, March 22nd, 2008 at 10:56 am. You can leave a response.

46 Responses to “CNN’s Canard About Wright’s Chickens Line”

1. Dave2882
   March 22nd, 2008 at 12:30 pm

   That’s an incredible find, AC and SG. I wonder when the media will ‘fess up.

2. Noyzmakr
   March 22nd, 2008 at 4:06 pm

   Excellent work SG and AC.
   Question: Why wouldn’t Roland Martin do this same research before arrogantly proclaiming Wright’s sermon was taken out of context? Answer: Because he, CNN and the rest of the drive by’s don’t want you to know the truth. They just want to cover for He Who Cannot Be Named and all the rest of the demonicrats.

   You won’t see this anywhere else folks (unless WND lifts it). Great work!

3. SG
   March 22nd, 2008 at 5:01 pm

   “You won’t see this anywhere else folks (unless WND lifts it).”

   Hehe. This could become the new slogan for the site.

4. Dave2882
   March 22nd, 2008 at 9:22 pm

   CNN has closed the comments thread for their story on “The full story behind Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s 9/11 sermon,” but if you want to leave them feedback about the “editorial error” committed by Mr. Martin, you can do so through this webform.

5. wardmama4
   March 22nd, 2008 at 9:43 pm

   Yes this is a great find - I would guess this makes Roland Martin the Jason Blair of CNN. . .

   You can always tell when CNN is lying, they end with ‘that our job is to seek the truth, and not the partial truth.’

   Still if you start with a lie, aren’t you still going to end up with a lie - no matter how you twist it, turn it or dress it up?

   Wow, the lengths these people are going to bend over backward to give Rev Wright a pass while pointing the finger at everyone else and calling them racist and wrong.

   HWCBN and the msm would have been better off to just say - Wright was wrong and I am sorry I ever stood up for the guy - this story would have been so over by now - and yet they continue to make it worse each and every day by bending over backward and committing other contortions to give Rev Wright a pass. . .Maybe they are doing it to keep HWCBN out of the media since the last time he spoke he shoved both of his bi-racial feet into his mouth with his ‘typical white person’ and ‘bred into their experience’ (whatever the heck that one means) remarks.

   Either way they are all making this into a bigger do than it needed to be - and I’m not sure any of them are going to like where it ends up.

6. Noyzmakr
   March 22nd, 2008 at 10:06 pm

   Thanks for the link Dave 2882
   I let them have it and pointed to this thread. I doubt anything will be done about it. The fight goes on…..

7. james t.
   March 23rd, 2008 at 8:08 am

   cnn will only give a commie point of view. there motto is lying and biased to
   the left.

8. cleduc
   March 23rd, 2008 at 7:37 pm

   “Weirder still, according to Lexus-Nexis Mr. Peck does not even seem to have appeared on Fox News until October 5, 2001.”

   The link and quote below is from an article/blog written by Paul Kassener Sept 15, 2001 who witnessed Ed Peck on FOX News between Sept 11 and Sept 15, 2001. Kassener is a writer/satirist now posting blogs on The Huffington Post (political website). Rev. Wright’s sermon of Sept 16th, 2001 quoted Ed Peck appearing on that show at that time. Below doesn’t provide the actual quote “Chickens coming home to roost) but it does carry some of the message and the type of things that Wright quoted him as saying.

   As I’ve sent the link to a few places including the mainstream news, I suspect it won’t be long before we have more confirmation.

   http://www.flyingsnail.com/paul-one.html
   Nothing Will Ever Be the Same
   by Paul Krassner, September 15, 2001

   For the past few days, I’ve been reading the newspapers, then checking the Internet to see what was left out of the papers, and then channel-surfing, from CNN (with their Americas New War logo, reassuring viewers that its not a rerun) to MTV (where one of the Beastie Boys advised: The last thing the terrorists want is for us to work together).

   On the Fox News Network, Edward Peck, former ambassador to Iraq, was an unusually outspoken guest. He said the terrorists acted as they did not because America is a freedom loving country, but because they feel the U.S. has been treating them the same way throughout the years–bombing Iraq for the last ten years whenever they felt like it–and adding to the list (Take Panama, take Haiti, take Cambodia) before he was cut off and dismissed.

9. cleduc
   March 23rd, 2008 at 7:42 pm

   Here’s some more video/links for Peck around that time:
   http://www.mahalo.com/Edward_Peck
   http://hotair.com/archives/200.....hezbollah/
   http://www.counterpunch.org/peck1.html

   Agains the position Rev. Wright quotes him on aligns.

   Peck also said around that time:
   Ambassador Peck equates US Government’s activities to terrorism: “U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331[1], and read the U.S. definition of terrorism. And one of them in here says • one of the terms, “international terrorism,” means “activities that,” I quote, “appear to be intended to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination or kidnapping.” […] Yes, well, certainly, you can think of a number of countries that have been involved in such activities. Ours is one of them. Israel is another. And so, the terrorist, of course, is in the eye of the beholder.”

   “They hate us because of things they see us doing to their part of the world that they definitely do not like.” Peck, Oct 8, 2001 on CNN

   we have been bombing Iraq whenever we feel like it for the last 10 years. Nobody likes that, least of all the Iraqis, and but lot of other people besides … We have accepted responsibility for the death of 500,000 Iraqi children - Edward Peck, former US Ambassador to Iraq

   And this got said:
   It is difficult to believe that Mr. Peters and I heard the same Fox News interview with the former ambassador to Mauretania, Edward Peck (”Tilting at Windmills,” October 2001). Instead of the mentioned contempt exhibited by David Asman, the interviewer, I felt that Mr. Peck was treated with admirable restraint, considering that his views could be considered highly inimical to the US, particularly in the aftermath of the atrocities at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Mr. Peck blamed the US. for perceived transgressions against Iraq. His claim that the US. constantly violates Iraqi territory by monitoring flights over that nation ignores the conditions of the agreement that ended the Persian Gulf conflict allowing such overflights.
   NELSON MARANS Letter, Silver Spring, Md.

   1 December 2001, Washington Monthly

   Again, Peck’s theme is in line with “Chickens coming home to roost”.

10. cleduc
    March 23rd, 2008 at 7:53 pm

    To me, between Sept 11, 2001 and Sept 16, 2001 many below expressed “chickens coming home to roost” as found criticism of US foreign policy - not as being unpatrotic or racist:

    One man, Mahdi Leroy Thorpe of Washington, said arrogant U.S. foreign policy invited the attacks.
    “It is a great day for America,” he said. “It is the case of the chickens coming home to roost. This country has gone into countries and tried to bring peace, to impose their will. They do not know what they are doing. . . . This country is racist, this country is immoral, this county is arrogant.”
    12 September 2001, The Globe and Mail

    How he would have reacted to Gore Vidal, on at lunchtime on Radio 4, one dreads to think: Vidal had said that there were “an awful lot of chickens coming home to roost” right now
    16 September 2001, Independent On Sunday

    The United States plays some really nasty politics on the international scene, and in some ways this really is chickens coming home to roost.
    RHODESSA JONES, SAN FRANCISCO PERFORMANCE ARTIST, DIRECTOR AND AUTHOR
    16 September 2001, The San Francisco Chronicle

    “The Americans used bin Laden. They imposed him on Afghanistan when they helped him to get rid of the Russians. They made him what he is and they must realise that. It is a case of the chickens coming home to roost.”
    Glasgow councillor Bashir Maan
    18 September 2001, Scottish Daily Record

    Rachel Giese, Antonia Zerbisias, Joey Slinger, columnist after columnist implying the U.S. got what it deserved. Thomas Walkom goes further: “the chickens coming home to roost” and “the U.S. reaped what it had sown.”
    19 September 2001, The Toronto Star
    And who taught Osama bin Laden how to be a terrorist? Our very own CIA trained him in guerrilla warfare to fight against the Russians in the Afghan war. Now it seems the chickens have come home to roost and we are left to pick up the pieces of the terrorism that terrorism begot.
    Editorial/Opinion
    15 September 2001, The News & Observer Raleigh, NC

    When I read Muslims posting messages of joy on Internet newsgroups, declaring, Malcolm X style, that the chickens have come home to roost, I wonder where these people come from.
    Editorial
    16 September 2001, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

    The attacks have left some in the anti-globalisation world searching their souls and others saying, albeit in very couched language, that it was simply a case of American policies coming home to roost.
    16 September 2001, Reuters News

    Article Title : America’s Chickens Come Home To Roost
    Opinion
    15 September 2001, Sydney Morning Herald

    For years, peace activists have warned that if the United States continued to pursue a foreign policy based on bombing all real and perceived enemies back to the Stone Age, the chickens would come home to roost some day.
    Editorial
    14 September 2001, The Oregonian

    Apparently, the chickens have begun coming home to roost. Before we initiate a knee-jerk backlash to Tuesday’s sad events, we had better inventory the store of hatred that U.S. actions have built up over the last 50 years in many parts of the world.
    Ronald L. Bontsema Letter
    14 September 2001, The Lexington Herald Leader

    We turned a blind eye to the Israeli settlement policy for a long time. We’ve sort of protested but we’ve never protested strong enough to make a difference. A lot of the chickens are coming home to roost
    Thomas Homer-Dixon, Centre for the Study of Peace and Conflict
    14 September 2001, The Canadian Press

    There also are those who felt that the chickens came home to roost, that our Middle East policy guaranteed we would someday experience what those the world over have become accustomed to - mass murder and violence in horrifying proportions.
    13 September 2001, New York Daily News

    My first thought upon hearing of the attack on the World Trade Center was, “The chickens are coming home to roost.” For how long did we think this most terrorist of nations could remain safe from retribution for the havoc and destruction it continues to wreak around the world?
    Jack Tobin
    12 September 2001, The Hartford Courant

    I’m on the phone with a friend. Long distance. I remind her of something another friend, also a New Yorker, said 25 years ago. The United States, he said, will not always be immune from the consequences of our worldwide alliances. At some point, he said, a terrorist response to our policies could break out at the U.N. or on the subway. Is that what has happened? Have the chickens, as Malcolm X once said, “come home to roost?”
    JEFF RIVERS; Courant Staff Writer
    12 September 2001, The Hartford Courant

    Yesterday’s attacks are the chickens of America’s callous abuse of others’ human rights coming home to roost.
    Comment & Analysis - Symbols of oppression.
    12 September 2001, The Guardian

    U.S. POLICY “COMES HOME TO ROOST”
    Reuters
    12 September 2001, Reuters News

    I’ll bet “what goes around ,comes around” and a bunch of others would turn up many more.

11. SG
    March 23rd, 2008 at 8:31 pm

    Thanks, cleduc.

    It still looks like Mr. Peck didn’t say it. Not that Reverend Wright said he did.

    Therefore Mr. Martin was spreading disinformation.

12. cleduc
    March 24th, 2008 at 5:36 am

    SG, we now know two things from those links:
    1. Contrary to the original blog, Ed Peck was on FOX between Sept 11th and Sept 15th.
    2. His position on US foreign policy was effectively “Chickens coming home to roost”

    So we have not confirmed the actual words yet but we have confirmed that was his position and that he was on FOX when Rev. Wright said he was - which contradicts the original blog. With that confirmation, it’s up to FOX to produce the tape or the transcript which may not happen because it would embarrass their position.

13. SG
    March 24th, 2008 at 10:52 am

    I take it you are not a native speaker of English, Cleduc.

    Even if Mr. Peck was on Fox News — indeed even if he used the phrase “chickens coming home to roost” (which would be totally out of character for him) — that would not change what Mr. Wright said.

    Wright claimed that Mr. Peck’s remarks proved the truth of Malcolm X’s phrase.

    Wright: “[Peck] pointed out that what Malcolm X said when he was silenced by Elijah Mohammad was in fact true, he [Malcolm] said Americas chickens, are coming home to roost.”

    As Mr. Obama has kindly pointed out, words mean things.

14. NewsAtTen
    March 24th, 2008 at 1:10 pm

    So far, Cleduc, you have provided nothing but the crudest of innuendo to buttress your position that Peck actually used Malcolm-X’s infamous phrase, ‘Chickens coming home to roost.’

    ‘MALCOLM X SCORES U.S. AND KENNEDY; Likens Slaying to ‘Chickens Coming Home to Roost’ Newspapers Chided’

    - from ‘The New York Times, ‘ December 2, 1963, Monday Page 21,
    http://select.nytimes.com/gst/.....-X+kennedy

15. NewsAtTen
    March 24th, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    Malcolm clarifies:

    ‘I meant that the death of Kennedy was the result of a long line of violent acts, the culmination of hate and suspicion and doubt in this country. You see, Lomax, this country has allowed white people to kill and brutalize those they don’t like. The assassination of Kennedy is a result of that way of life and thinking. The chickens came home to roost; that’s all there is to it. America—at the death of the President—just reaped what it had been sowing…’

    - from ‘A Summing Up: Louis Lomax interviews Malcolm X,’ by Louis Lomax, 1963
    http://teachingamericanhistory.....cument=539

    Malcolm expands:

    ‘The white man is by nature a devil and must be destroyed. The black man will inherit the earth; he will resume control, taking back the position he held centuries ago when the white devil was crawling around the caves of Europe on his all fours. Before the white devil came into our lives we had a civilization, we had a culture, we were living in silks and satins. Then he put us in chains and put us aboard the “Good Ship Jesus,” and we have lived in hell ever since.’

    http://teachingamericanhistory.....cument=539

16. cleduc
    March 24th, 2008 at 1:41 pm

    SG, How else can one explain why Bin Laden did what he did on 9/11?

    Here’s some of what Bin Laden said about that and his motivation:

    Bin Laden claims responsibility for 9/11
    http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/.....41029.html
    [quote]The militant Islamic group decided “we should destroy towers in America” because “we are a free people… and we want to regain the freedom of our nation,” said bin Laden, dressed in yellow and white robes and videotaped against a plain brown background. …

    He also threatened new attacks if the policies of the U.S. government do not change. …

    “Your security is not in the hands of [Democratic presidential candidate John] Kerry or Bush or al-Qaeda. Your security is in your own hands.

    “Each state that does not meddle with our security has naturally guaranteed its own security.”

    The al-Qaeda leader said he decided that militants should start planning to attack the United States in the wake of Israel’s 1982 invasion of Lebanon, when apartment towers in Beirut were bombed. The U.S. backed Israel in that action, he said.

    Bin Laden also said Bush had misled the American people in the three years since al-Qaeda’s 19 hijackers accomplished their deadly mission.

    “Bush is still deceiving you and hiding the truth from you and therefore the reasons are still there to repeat what happened,” he said. [/quote]

    How much clearer could Bin Laden make it?

    Chickens did come home to roost due to US foreign policy just as Peck has consistently indicated and just as Wright related in his sermon.

    Here’s what Wright went on to say:
    “Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism. A white ambassador said that y’all, not a black militant. Not a reverend who preaches about racism. An ambassador whose eyes are wide open and who is trying to get us to wake up and move away from this dangerous precipice upon which we are now poised. The ambassador said the people we have wounded don’t have the military capability we have. But they do have individuals who are willing to die and take thousands with them. And we need to come to grips with that.”

    From transcript of Capitol Hill conference convened by the Middle East Policy Council. The meeting was held on May 4, 2000, in the Dirksen Senate Office Building with Chas. W. Freeman and Edward Peck

    “Finally, a very real cost of playing the role of policeman in the Gulf is the increased danger of terrorist retaliation against the American homeland.” Freeman

    18 January 1991, NBC News: Nightly News
    Brokaw: “As every passing day grows worse and worse for Saddam Hussein, is he more and more likely to turn to terrorism as a counterstrike weapon? Mr. Peck? “

    Peck: “Yes sir, I would say he was. In this–in the circumstances that pertain out there today, he’s going to have to do far less urging than he would otherwise. Because they–the Arab masses–not the governments that are under coalition, but the Arab masses will be stressed out over the fact that it’s their–their ethnic and religious cohorts that are being–who are being badly mistreated by us. “

    Peck was warning the US of the chances of the chickens coming home to roost long before 9/11.

17. SG
    March 24th, 2008 at 2:11 pm

    “SG, How else can one explain why Bin Laden did what he did on 9/11?”

    Bin Laden and several of the hijackers cited the US’s policy towards Bosnia as their motivation for 9/11:

    9/11 Hijackers: “We Want To Avenge… Bosnia!” | Sweetness & Light
    http://sweetness-light.com/arc.....nge-bosnia

    The US was on the side of the MUSLIMS in Bosnia.

    But you are obdurately missing the point. The CNN “journalist” claimed Wright was using Mr. Peck’s words when he uttered the “chickens come home to roost” remark.

    He was not. This is not something up for debate. It’s what is known as a fact.

18. JohnMG
    March 24th, 2008 at 2:17 pm

    I think you’re wasting your time, SG. “There are none so blind as they who cannot see.”
    Everyone else here seems to get it.

19. Noyzmakr
    March 24th, 2008 at 2:20 pm

    Gosh cleduc….I’m convinced now that I’ve heard it straight from the lips of OBL. America really does deserve to be put to death. Where do I get in line? We’ve never done anything good for the planet. Right? Hell, we’re all killing the planet by turning on all our lights at night or even typing on our computers. Oh sh*t, let me stop before another polar bear dies. Give me a break!!!

    Ecept for having a hand in freeing the peoples of countries like Bosnia-Herzegovina, Croatia, Afghanistan, Russia, Grenada, Kuwait, South Korea, the former captive nations of Romania, Bulgaria, the Czechs, Slovakia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary not to mention Japan, Germany, France, Italy, Iraq, Spain, Haiti, Panama, ect., ect. we haven’t done any good for anyone on this planet. And Isael. That’s the one that really gets you isn’t it?
    I’d rather die for trying to free people than to live in a country run by appologists and appeasers.
    Go ahead and vote for HWCBN and Billary and you’ll get just what you deserve. %90 tax rates and an “overseer” in every home to make sure you don’t light that evil cigar or feed your kids red meat.

20. Sojourner
    March 29th, 2008 at 7:12 am

    The video left out the part where Wright introduces his so-called “Faith-note” (a footnote in the middle of a sermon) which might have helped a bit for clairty since we hear him end the faith-note, but but not the beginning.

    At this point we know that the essence of the “faith-note” was to refer to the wisdom of a former Iraq ambassador and Regan administration counter-terrorism expert. The only issue is whether the exact phrase is a direct quote of Peck, or a pithy rephrasing since the phrase itself was not originated by Peck, Malcolm X or anyone else living today most likely.

    It would be interesting to know if Fox can pull it’s transcripts from Lexis/Nexus, But the fact that the interview has mysteriously disappeared down the memory hole leaves room for speculation about how and why, but cannot lead to conclusions unless it resurfaces.

    At this point the worst you can say about the CNN article is that PERHAPS he should have said it was a SUMMARY of Peck not a QUOTE of him. Clearly the overall message of his article is true and sheds more light than heat. Conversely the Fox snippets leave a rather misleading impression despite being exact.

    Your research was good and the data you should have found was not there. You didn’t do anything wrong, but you opened calling the CNN story a “canard”, others were comparing him to Jason Blair (an interesting choice) and now you are trying to hide behind a pretty thin technicality.

    I say give Cleduc a pat on the back and move on.

    -S

21. retire05
    March 29th, 2008 at 11:39 am

    Perhaps those who subscribe to the “chickens coming home to roost” philosphy would like to explain to me what Austria ever did to the Middle East? Austria, you say? What does Austria have to do with the U.S. involvement in the Middle East, you ask?

    I point this out only because those of you who apologize for radical Islam seem to know little of history.
    So I advise you to study. Start with this date; September 11, 1683.

    Get back to me when you have majored in reality.

22. JohnMG
    March 29th, 2008 at 11:49 am

    Sic ‘em, retire05!! History isn’t just limited to what has happened in the last fifty years.

    Well done. Point, game, and match!!

23. wardmama4
    March 29th, 2008 at 12:05 pm

    -’The only issue is whether the exact phrase is a direct quote of Peck’-
    -’But the fact that the interview has mysteriously disappeared down the memory hole leaves room for speculation about how and why’-

    Sorry - there is proof that Peck did not appear on Fox when stated by Rev Wright - therefore it is proven wrong.
    The only proof you and cleduc are using to confuse the real point/issue and to prove your disagreement are people ‘claiming’ to have heard and or said this around the time of Sept 11 - none of whom are Peck - therefore it is again (with your ‘proof’) proven wrong.

    Here let me fix this - ‘I would guess this makes Roland Martin the Jason Blair of CNN’-

    I would guess this makes Roland Martin the Jayson Blair, Dan Rather and Michael Moore of CNN . . .

24. JohnMG
    March 29th, 2008 at 12:38 pm

    wardmama4; ….”I would guess this makes Roland Martin the Jayson Blair, Dan Rather and Michael Moore of CNN…..”

    “Round up the usual suspects”

25. Sojourner
    March 29th, 2008 at 8:45 pm

    retire05
    This is scarcely relivant. This is somewhat analoguous to saying “I once knew a Christian guy how punched a Hindu guy for not good reason. Therefore if any other Christian were to have an issue with me today, it reflects his aggressive Christain nature not the fact that I kicked him in the shins yesterday as he accurately claims.” Just because a country of one religion did something wrong does not prove anything about other events involving other actors. “Game set and match???” All you need to do is find a bad move by someone Muslim and you are free of responsability for your actions against all musilims? Are you so caught in an “us and them” mentality that you can sidestep your behavior based on something like this!?

    Of course if we want to go back in our history we would remember two things. 1) Turkey straddles both Europe and the Middle-East so making it a simple East/West conflict is a bit of a distortion. 2) If you want to look back at history, the capital of that empire-Constantinopal was the capital of multiple Empires at different times in history. It’s name comes from it’s time as the capital of the Holy Roman Empire under the Frenchman Emperor Constatine. So you are actually talking about a city that has been switched back and forth a few times between the two religions several times and in all cases has been Empirial. It was an Emprial long before Mohamad was born. 3) To throw stones at Islam for this is remarkably hypocritical since Christians did very much the same things then and for centuries after. You could debat about whether of not Christians had an even greater tendency to spread religion at the end of a sword than the Musilim empires but suffice to say we are choosing among rotten apples and one does not justify the other.

    Wardmama

    I must have missed the proof you are talking about that shows that Peck was not on Fox that week. Proof would be finding out which show he was suppose to be on and seeing he was not there. Failing to find the interview in a general Nexus search suggests that it might not have happened but is far from proof. An article from a second person who on the september 15th 2001 refer to the interview with Peck on Fox is a potent denial. That is a 2nd independent source- confirmation. What are you suggesting? That Wright got the date wrong? or that he made up an interview with Peck? The second option does not seems very plausible given the evidence here. It is clearly accurate that the comment reflects the general attitude of Peck. If he said that on September 10th- so what? It is beside the point.

    The sermon is about taking responsability for our past actions and being responsible in our response to a horrible violation. There was a time when these were if anything, conservative values.

    -S

26. Sojourner
    March 29th, 2008 at 8:49 pm

    Hey, Sorry about the grammar and spelling, I’ll proofread next time. :-)

27. Noyzmakr
    March 29th, 2008 at 9:55 pm

    Okay ….here we go

    Sojourner writes…

    “All you need to do is find a bad move by someone Muslim and you are free of responsability for your actions against all musilims?”

    First of all, I don’t know anyone who’s done a damn thing to any Muslim. Certainly not anyone here. As a matter of fact, the US has fought side by side with Muslims to free them from oppression for years. Bosnia, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan are just a few recent examples. So get your facts straight.

    Second: If the bloody animals would stop attacking our allies and us there would be no need for us to be anywhere near there damn countries.

    Sojourner writes…

    “To throw stones at Islam for this is remarkably hypocritical since Christians did very much the same things then and for centuries after. You could debat about whether of not Christians had an even greater tendency to spread religion at the end of a sword than the Musilim empires but suffice to say we are choosing among rotten apples and one does not justify the other.”

    There you go again! Christians, in the whole history of the religion, are responsible for fewer deaths in the name of religion than Islam has killed in one year on this planet. That’s just a fact you can’t get around. Muslims carry out almost every terrorist attack on this planet! Nearly every one!!

    http://dineshdsouza.com/

    Sojourner writes…

    “The sermon is about taking responsability for our past actions and being responsible in our response to a horrible violation. There was a time when these were if anything, conservative values.”

    You need to back off on your medication there pal. I have never heard a conservative say “God Damn America”! Not once. Not even while joking. I have never heard a conservative blame the troubles of one race on another. I have never heard a conservative blame America for 9-11. I have only heard these things from LIBERALS!!

    My blood pressure is getting up. I had better stop now before I do an exhaustive internet search…….

28. wardmama4
    March 29th, 2008 at 10:20 pm

    Yes I guess you did miss the point - SG (as usual) posted dates and a search of Lexis-Nexis which show that Peck did not appear on Fox until Oct 8th which was after Wrights ’sermon’. Simple fact.

    What you are (I guess attempting to say) and cleduc posted - also prove that Wright could not have been quoting Peck - since the dates don’t match (again) and the rest is just what other people said - not Peck.

    The point being is that Wright is sloppy (at least) or an outright liar (worst) - and you just want to quibble on stupid points in the face of an abomination of the words Reverand, Christian and church -

    Try watching Fitna or Obession and then come back with that Christian ‘did very much the same things then and for centuries afterward’ - excuse me, in this day and age, if a Christian beheaded a Muslim - it would still be front page news and video run on every channel 24/7/365.

    And therein is the crux of the whole issue - with both Wright and Islam - what they cling to, promote and practice is the very thing they are screaming about the other side being guilty of (at one time in the past). . .Get over it. Or expect your hatred and violence to be thrown back in your face.

29. Sojourner
    March 30th, 2008 at 1:45 am

    Noysmakr

    I was not suggesting that America held that view about Muslims, rather I was suggesting that it is the absurd view which was being implied by retired05. Reduct um Absurd um I think they call it.

    We were certainly in the Middle-East long before we had problems with terrorism deposing democratic leaders in Iran and manipulating internal affairs in several places. In fact our terrorism problems are at least in part a response to our backing of tyrannical governments such as the one in Saudi Arabia and our bases there. (That was Osama’s main grip remember?

    I sincerely doubt that Muslims have killed more people in one year in the name of religion than Christians have in their history, please clarify. Perhaps you mean more killing by terrorist in 911? Still I don’t think so. Are you ignoring government terror, and killing bye Christian empires? The Crusades? etc. Terrorism is a tactic, and no one has a monopoly on it, but we do focus more on Islamic terrorist these days. Remember the IRA? The Contras? When we smeared Mandella and the ANC as terrorist?

    Here’s a good question-Do you remember the terrorist plot to assassinate the US congressman from California by bombing his office? Can you name the organization responsible? The hint is that it came to light 2 months after 911 when we were truly focused on dealing with terror. Do you remember or do you need to do a websearch?

    As for the “Dam America” line, you are smearing things together and not dealing specifically and directly with what I am talking about. That was a different speech and I have not seen it for context, so I will not comment except to say that I have real problems when I hear someone in the pulpit trying to dam anyone or any thing!

    I would call Falwell a conservative and he certainly pointed to Americans for 911. Most progressives don’t “blame America”, they take responsibility for their role in a disaster and try to find ways to fix the problem. That is not to imply that it is their fault or that someone else is not primarily responsible and it certainly does not justify the actions of others. But it is the mature, responsible and dare I say “Christian” thing to do.

30. Sojourner
    March 30th, 2008 at 2:19 am

    SG said Peck did not appear on a Lexis Nexus search until Oct 5th (not 8th). That does not prove it did not happen. A failure to find is not proof. The confirmation from other sources is stronger evidence.

    “Get over it. Or expect your hatred and violence to be thrown back in your face.”

    Lumping over a billion people together and offering them a threat of violence is irresponsible and revealing. Failing to see the huge number of condemnations which sprang forth from Muslim countries and religious figures to both 911 and the beheading suggests a desire for violence and/or scapegoating of innocent people whom you neither known nor understand. It is the essence of what the Wright sermon was concerned about.

    Did you listen to the whole sermon? or are you happier cartooning a man whom it appears seeks to do good works in spite of his obvious frustration and anger? From what I’ve seen here, he is far from the only angry American, but he does seem a lot more focused on trying to minimize the bloodshed than most.

    -S

31. 1republicanscientist
    March 30th, 2008 at 2:26 am

    sojourner
    after every disaster and catastrophic event, do you see muslim organizations lining up to indescriminantly help anyone affected by that event? No, not that I can recall. How much of the worlds poor are fed and educated by muslim organizations? Africa is a good place to start. How many African Christians have been slaughtered by muslims over the past 20 years? Alot. How many Hindus in India and Bangladesh have been slaughtered, raped and held at firing lines by muslims over the past 50 years? Alot. In fact, I have friends at work who had to escape Bangladesh because of the wholesale slaughter of Hindus by muslims, literal lining up and shooting all who refuse to convert to islam. This is fact, this is from actual citizens, not some muslim web site or MSM crap spew. After the tsunami, how many muslim nations sent in cargo ships full of aid and helicopter after helicopter in order to goods to people? Not many, in fact, alot of the people who the US helped were praising nosama bin hidin’ while American service men delivered aid to their sorry asses. How many people did Mother Theresa help over the years? Is there or was there ever a muslim counter part? Cat Stevens doesn’t count.

32. Noyzmakr
    March 30th, 2008 at 5:01 am

    Sojourner says….

    “We were certainly in the Middle-East long before we had problems with terrorism deposing democratic leaders in Iran and manipulating internal affairs in several places. In fact our terrorism problems are at least in part a response to our backing of tyrannical governments such as the one in Saudi Arabia and our bases there. (That was Osama’s main grip remember?”

    We were certainly in the Middle-East long before we had problems with terrorism?????

    You are kidding!! Right?? You can’t be that ignorant of history! Can you?

    This all started long, long ago. The US involvement happened slowly. Islam has ALWAYS been a despicable, murderous religion. Maybe you would like to do a little research before you make claims that don’t hold any validity.

    A little history lesson…..

    The Barbary states of North Africa (or, if you prefer, the North African provinces of the Ottoman Empire, plus Morocco) were using the ports of today’s Algeria, Libya, and Tunisia to wage a war of piracy and enslavement against all shipping that passed through the Strait of Gibraltar. Thousands of vessels were taken.
    Muslim pirate slavers who over many centuries enslaved millions of Africans and tens of thousands of Christian Europeans and Americans in the Islamic “Barbary” states, over the course of 10 centuries, cruised the African and Mediterranean coastline, pillaging villages and seizing slaves.

    The taking of slaves in pre-dawn raids on unsuspecting coastal villages had a high casualty rate. It was typical of Muslim raiders to kill off as many of the “non-Muslim” older men and women as possible so the preferred “booty” of only young women and children could be collected.

    Young non-Muslim women were targeted because of their value as concubines in Islamic markets. Islamic law provides for the sexual interests of Muslim men by allowing them to take as many as four wives at one time and to have as many concubines as their fortunes allow.

    Boys, as young as 9 or 10 years old, were often mutilated to create eunuchs who would bring higher prices in the slave markets of the Middle East. Muslim slave traders created “eunuch stations” along major African slave routes so the necessary surgery could be performed. It was estimated that only a small number of the boys subjected to the mutilation survived after the surgery.

    When American colonists rebelled against British rule in 1776, American merchant ships lost Royal Navy protection. With no American Navy for protection, American ships were attacked and their

    Christian crews enslaved by Muslim pirates operating under the control of the “Dey of Algiers”–an Islamist warlord ruling Algeria.

    “……..one cannot get around what Jefferson heard when he went with John Adams to wait upon Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785. When they inquired by what right the Barbary states preyed upon American shipping, enslaving both crews and passengers, America’s two foremost envoys were informed that “it was written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Muslim who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.”

    Not long after Jefferson’s inauguration as president in 1801, he dispatched a group of frigates to defend American interests in the Mediterranean, and informed Congress.

    In 1805, American Marines marched across the desert from Egypt into Tripolitania, forcing the surrender of Tripoli and the freeing of all American slaves.

    During the Jefferson administration, the Muslim Barbary States, crumbling as a result of intense American naval bombardment and on shore raids by Marines, finally officially agreed to abandon slavery and piracy.

    Jefferson’s victory over the Muslims lives on today in the Marine Hymn, with the line, “From the halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli, We fight our country’s battles in the air, on land and sea.”

    It wasn’t until 1815 that the problem was fully settled by the total defeat of all the Muslim slave trading pirates.

    Jefferson had been right. The “medium of war” was the only way to put and end to the Muslim problem.

    So you see my friend. Muslims have been attacking the US and it’s allies since the founding of this country and the only time they seem to leave us alone is when we beat them to a bloody pulp and keep them in their place. As I said before, If they would only leave us alone we wouldn’t go near their damn stinking countries, but because they insist on imposing their religion on the whole world then we will have to kill every single one that’s stupid enough to show up on the battle field against us. And it’s much better that the battlefield is in their backyard rather than ours. Only most of these cowards prefer to bomb innocent women and children with lone, deranged individuals who are so brainwashed they think they’re actually going to get a huge mansion with 72 bedrooms, with 72 virgins and everyday will be new virgins. What a sick dream!

    They will not listen to talk from the UN, you aren’t going to appease people who think that Allah wants them to kill or convert the world. Preferably kill it seems…

    I hope, if I can borrow a phrase from The Man Who Cannot Be Named, that you’re not the next innocent American to die at the hands of these animals, but then again you’re not that innocent.

    Are you?

33. Sojourner
    March 30th, 2008 at 8:31 am

    Well Noyz . It looks like you have read your Christopher Hitchens (a bloviating ass if ever there was one- though sometimes amusing) and you make a good point, But first when we had those problems we were “going near their dam countries”. Second, Piracy is illegal and immoral and I am sure it’s victims were terrified, however it does not meet any present-day definition of terrorism which is what we were talking about. It was not an attempt to advance an political policy or agenda in the US through fear.

    Third. Let’s go back to that era. Yes they did lots of ugly things in that time, however remember that their slave trade was dwarfed by the Christian US/European slavery activities of that era. This is hardly a religious issue. This is a problem with selfish humans rationalizing extraordinary abuse of their fellow man for their own gain. It has been done by black white brown and yellow. Christian and Muslims both were both committing atrocities and the new system of slavery in the US was a more virulent for of slavery than had been practiced up to that time.

    There is a lot of irony here. Jefferson, himself a slave own, in a country that had kidnapped thousands of slaves every year- killing about 1/3 of their slaves in the horrendous conditions of the slave ships alone. Jefferson is sent toy say it is “wrong” to kidnap us and turn us into slaves? That is the height of hypocrisy and Thomas Jefferson was a far better man than that!

    Recall also that Jefferson had his own copy of the Qua ran. Jefferson didn’t jump to the “Medium of War:” irresponsibly or without making an attempt to understand his adversary. This is international politics not an issue of religion beyond the point that the in essence the Americas and Europe dehumanized people based on the color of their skin, and North/West African used religion as the way of judging and placing themselves above their fellow man.

    From where I am sitting I see a pattern of trying to paint all Muslims based on examples where some have been wrong, but I don’t see a willingness to take responsibility for the wrongs of all Christians or even to recognize what they were doing at the time.

    Christians are people and they vary over time location and by individual, it is not fair to lump them all together especially over time. The same is true of people from other religions.

    And I still don’t see you taking responsibility for the things our government has done and is doing that contributed to the resentments that allow that madman to continue to get recruits. The battle is not to sway Bin Ladin, it is to regain the trust of millions of people in places like Iran where thousand came out on the streets to hold a candlelight vigil on 9/12 for dead American.

    As you point out, most of the Middle-east lined up with us in Desert Storm, and many helped us with the attack on Afghanistan. Despite the disaster of the last 6 years we can still act as the world leader and a force for good. But we have to stand up, look at the world honestly and show our character. That doesnt mean torturing thousands of random Afghans and Iraqi or throwing lots of stones to protect a glass house.

    When you are too quick to attack innocent people you become part of the problem, not the solution. In the war on terror the quality of your aiming is more important than caliber of your bullets.

    By the way, did anyone remember who was trying to murder a US Congressman with a bomb? It was the Jewish Defense League tried to kill a Lebanese American (Christian) Darrell Issa. FBI busted the plot in December 2001, yet it was minor news. Few remember the clear and acknowledged plan which also included bombing a mosque. There have been white separatists targeting African Americans, and several other groups with large scale murder on their minds. The truth is only Muslim terrorist plots make the front page and stay there for days. even though several have been nothing more than suspicion and posturing, while very serious plots by a rainbow of foreign and domestic nut-jobs are a footnote on page 3.

    -S

34. JohnMG
    March 30th, 2008 at 11:07 am

    Wow, tavelin’ man, that’s profound! I’d like to crawl inside your head and see what’s in there, but I suspect it would look something like a dumpster. Whatever. You’re pretty adept at mixing metaphors and drawing parallels where none exist. Yet you seem to believe you have the answers. Tell you what. You go on over there with your DNC talking points and Obama foreign policy and calm these fools down for us, will ya. I’ll just hide and watch. When they saw your head off and hand it to you, bring it on back with you and explain what went wrong. If you want to be an apologist for that murderous bunch of assholes, that’s fine with me. Just do it on your own time and don’t involve those of us with our heads on our shoulders where they belong. You either can’t or won’t acknowledge that Islam is not a religion but a political ideology masquerading as a religion. If you persist in rationalizing their motives, there is no hope for you. No one has persecuted islam without just cause. The pity is that when given the opportunity to erradicate it from the face of the earth, civil nations left enough of its adherents alive to reproduce and perpetuate their cancerous beliefs. Cancer is treated with radiation therapy. That seems like an appropriate course of action if not the preferred option. If you find that an unpleasant thought, tuck your head back where it seems most familiar to you and let the adults handle the chores.

35. Noyzmakr
    March 30th, 2008 at 2:39 pm

    JohnMG writes… “…..civil nations left enough of its adherents alive to reproduce and perpetuate their cancerous beliefs. Cancer is treated with radiation therapy. That seems like an appropriate course of action if not the preferred option….”

    Now that’s profound!!

    As for Sojourner, what can I say? If you prefer to live your life in a self created bubble of ignorance disguised as a once brilliant mind then you go right ahead. I just hope that someone like you isn’t calling the shots when the moment comes to wipe these vermin off the face of the Earth and this time we won’t leave a remnant.

36. Noyzmakr
    March 30th, 2008 at 7:28 pm

    Sojourner,
    It’s thinking like yours that is really dangerous for our country and its allies. You loathe the military while you claim patriotism and insist you’re trying to keep the peace among all mankind. But it’s your policies, such as your writings here reflect, that get us into the positions where we must go and sacrifice our most precious treasure. Liberals like you and your worldview scream to no end about us going to war to protect our interests and citizens when we try to eliminate the problem. Then later, because we try your strategy so we can shut you up, we slow our pursuit of the enemy or just stop and pull out all together so as not to offend the world (Gulf War), and it’s those exact policies that make it possible for the enemy to gather strength, attack us again and then we have to expend even more blood and treasure to do what we could have done in the beginning. North Korea is a prime example of how those policies that you say will work better have allowed a rogue nation with a clearly psychotic tyrannical leader to get his hands on nuclear weapons. The world owes a debt of thanks to people like you in the Clinton administration for that great maneuver. Now we have got to clean up your mess and when we do, a lot of innocent people will probably die not to forget the hundreds of thousands of already suffering and dead North Koreans. Now there’s Iran. As soon as they get a bomb ready to test, where do you think they’ll test it? Tel Aviv, that’s where and then we will have to kill millions of people instead of a few thousand now to stop them. So you aren’t as compassionate as you present yourself. I think it would be much more compassionate to kill off a few rogue leaders and free the people than to have to kill millions of innocent people because they happen to live in a country run by insane bigots. And if you think we won’t have to nuke these bastards to stop them then you’ve got another thing coming. The longer you make us wait the more likely it is that those terrible weapons will be used. If we eliminate the enemy now, it is much less likely that weapons like that will ever have to be used and in turn less sacrifice of our blood and treasure. You appeasers have been so wrong, so many times, as shown throughout history that I, for the life of me, can’t understand why anyone would even allow himself or herself to listen to your obvious America hating rhetoric. And now, I’m not anymore. So you can write until your little bleeding heart is content, but I will not read or even acknowledge your posts. It might as well be brainwashing and I won’t allow myself to be diverted from seeing the truth of who our enemy is and what we as a nation must do. Now go back to the Huff & Puff post and leave the clean up to us adults.
    Have a nice day!

37. Sojourner
    March 30th, 2008 at 10:01 pm

    Ahhhh, a call for genocide. Finally! It must feel good to let that out eh John?

    You are a sharp guy Noyz and you know dam good and well what just happened, it will take a lot of self-deception and shared lies paste it over. Your last little speech does not fool anyone. You refer to African Americans as “drive bys”, speak of keeping Muslims “in their place” and consistently label them as animals, vermin (Hitler’s favorite) and a variety of other sub-human pejoratives. Now you call for genocide. Come to grips with your anger and violent impulses and stop looking for excuses to vent it on innocent victims.

    If you don’t know about the efforts by Muslim nation to help after disasters, or the displays of support the governments and peoples of those countries offered after 911 or the large number of condemnations of fellow Muslims which occur after Muslim crazies commit atrocious acts, then you had better spend some time watching something besides the JINGOISTIC American mainstream media!

    Of course you can stick with Fox and CNN and other American sources where the goal is to keep Americans pissed off then tell them only the part of the news they want to hear. How many times did you see that crazy woman from Palestine dancing after 911?? and how many shots did you get of the walks and prays in Jerusalem or the thousands holding vigils in places like Tehran that night?

    Remember the 2 guys on 911 who listed the crimes against Muslims in Bosnia as part of their reason for participation? Bosnia where American forces protected the Muslims from those crimes!!! But all that fool knew was that Christians were killing Muslims, so he will kill some Christians. Perhaps he read lots of books where he knew from looking at the cover, he would read bad things about Christians.

    As for leaving the cleanup to “Adults” are those the people who think that they never do anything wrong? “never did anything to any Muslim?” Adults take responsibility, they don’t hate themselves for their mistakes, and they keep trying.

    -S

38. DEZ
    March 30th, 2008 at 10:29 pm

    “Ahhhh, a call for genocide. Finally! It must feel good to let that out eh John? ”
    Sometimes we forget only muslims have the right to call for such atrocities, And its animate supporters.

39. Clarissimus
    March 30th, 2008 at 11:56 pm

    You refer to African Americans as “drive bys”

    Actually he’s referring to the mainstream media, i.e. ABC, CNN, AP, etc. Though I understand if you’re not familiar with the term — you don’t strike me as someone who listens to Rush. ;-)

40. JohnMG
    March 31st, 2008 at 12:44 am

    Actully, I prefer action to words, nomad. It should be plain enough to anyone that the only reason you’re still able to spew freely as you do is because countless thousands like me have been willing to suit up and stand athwart the path of these miscreants and prevent them from silencing everyone who disagrees with their seventh century world view. Somehow your convoluted mind has concluded that they’ll like YOU and leave YOU alone if you join them in their intense dislike for this country and the freedom for which it stands. You’re only able to sue for peace when you’re on top of the heap. When you’ve gone “all in” and lose you can beg all you want to no avail. I don’t happen to be ready to roll over yet. If you are, go for it Spanky–there’s no anchor in your ass.

    Clarissimus had it mostly right when he said “you don’t strike me as someone who listens to Rush”, but he used two too many words. I’ve got you pegged thusly; “you don’t strike me as someone who listens”!

    And DEZ understands how you think we should play the game, too, when he sarcastically says “only muslims have the right to call for such atrocities”. Meanwhile, our side seems to be stuck with “rules of engagement”.

    You actually sound like one of the muslim bretheren. If that’s so and you’ve had your feelings hurt, tough shit! Or maybe you’ve just been swilling the Kool-Aid. If that’s the case, have another cup. You stand a better chance of convincing those cretins to stop their jihad-trocities than you do of changing my mind on how to deal with them. You’ve apparently chosen which side you’d rather be on. Too bad you’re clueless .

41. Noyzmakr
    March 31st, 2008 at 12:46 am

    Thank you Clarissimus. I’m sure Sojourner never listens to anything close to the truth.

42. Noyzmakr
    March 31st, 2008 at 12:49 am

    JohnMG writes…. “…go for it Spanky–there’s no anchor in your ass.”

    ROFLMAO!!!!!

43. Gila Monster
    March 31st, 2008 at 2:06 am

    Well Sojourner, I see you borrowed your tag from Isabella Baumfree.

    Sojourner stated, “We were certainly in the Middle-East long before we had problems with terrorism deposing democratic leaders in Iran and manipulating internal affairs in several places. In fact our terrorism problems are at least in part a response to our backing of tyrannical governments such as the one in Saudi Arabia and our bases there. (That was Osama’s main grip remember?”

    Bases in the sandbox? Pray tell oh wise one, exactly where “our” US bases are located in Saudi Arabia? (Final Jeopardy music playing…….). Still waiting….?? Buzzer sounds, …crickets chirping.

    Perhaps your lack of an answer is due to the fact we have no “bases” in SA.

    Did the US put the Saud royal family in power? Do you have any clue as to the history of SA?
    The Saud family has been in power since roughly 1744 which also coincides with the rise of the Wahhabism sect of Islam in SA. And BTW, OBL is a Wahhabist.
    So the ruling party of SA has been in power for over 260 years, the predominant sect of SA is OBL’s preferred sect of Islam,. Yet, this is the fault of the US?

    Get a grip Sojourner!! Perhaps if you actually read something besides the term papers you bought from the local DNC office in order to pass your sociology classes at Liberal U, you just might learn a thing or two. Just sayin’…. ;o}

44. Noyzmakr
    March 31st, 2008 at 2:14 am

    My hero….

45. Gila Monster
    April 2nd, 2008 at 1:55 am

    No taste for battle Sojourner? Facts get you down?

46. Sojourner
    April 14th, 2008 at 8:41 am

    Hey, didnot see Gila’s comments and was bored, so I have not been here in a while.

    I didn’t have Isabelle in mind when I chose my name. She was far from the first or the last of the sojourners, but certainly one worth remembering. I’m glad you did.

    And you? are you from the desert? The Mojave? or is it that you love to jaw the poison in slowly? LOL

    Thank you for mentioning the lack of bases in SA. You are right we don’t have troops in SA. BUT we did on 911. (Google- US troops, Saudi Arabia and Bin Laden, there are several articles about the pull-out )

    We talked the Saudis into letting us have folks there for Desert Shield. We supposedly offered assurances that we would leave when the threat was over. Bin Laden was furious because he had his seasoned fighter feeling fresh after outlasting the Soviets in Afghanistan. He wanted be the one to boot Saddam out of Kuwait and wanted SA to reject the US offer. He hated Saddam (not the fact that he was a mass murder of course, just that he was secular. He also warned that we would not leave once we were there.

    So now ask yourself. We spend a lot of time talking about not wanting to embolden our enemies. What happens when the Saudi Terrorists attack us for what we do in SA and n response we attack Afghanistan and Iraq but pull out of Saudi Arabia?

    Ol George is sending a message alright. The same one a bully sends when he backs down from a fight with tough guy then picks a fight with someone smaller. Yah, the wimps get scared, but Bin Leiden’s crew is worse than ever.

    Of course imagine how it looks like to folks in the middle-east like Jordan and Lebanon, who then see such an unpopular attack on Iraq based on false pretenses and followed by an understaffed and irresponsible occupation. Then the influx of millions of refugees saying We were much better off with Saddam!

    There is nothing wrong with invading Iraq or Afghanistan, but timing and execution are critical!!! This is WAR! it is a global conflict and it is going to get ugly. But how we conduct ourselves will determine how long and difficult the battle will be.

    John, I think your preference for action drives you and Bush Jr. General Sanchez, the original Commander in Iraq quoted an old Japanese saying to describe Iraq “Action, without vision is a nightmare.”

    Dez, Even Bin Laden hasn’t called for wiping all Westerners from the earth. His claim is he wants to reduce our presence in what he regards as “Muslim lands”. John’s craving for a Final Solution puts him in a rare class or madmen. He makes guys like Pol Pot look like reform school boys. But if Bin Laden suddenly changed his mind after seeing what Johns and Noz want to do, and decided he did want to wipe us off the planet, would that make it okay?

    So what does your moral compass tell you? Is genocide always bad, or just when it is directed at you and your friends. Is there a time when you would have to oppose what your friends do because it’s wrong? Is there anything that John and Noz could do to a Muslim child that you would object to?

    -S

Leave a Reply

You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.