I first heard of this story while listening to ‘The Larry Elder Show’ this morning. Honestly, I don’t like Cenk Uygur, not in the least. I believe his is downright dishonest, immature, ill-informed and extremely partisan. If MSNBC fired Cenk because of any of these reasons, or because of his extremely poor ratings (despite what Cenk said to Kurtz, the truth is that his ratings were terrible), then there wouldn’t be anything wrong here. The issue here that, as Cenk told CNN’s Howard Kurtz during his interview on ‘Reliable Sources’, he was replaced simply because he was being critical of President Barack Obama. Do I believe him? In this instance, yes.
If anything, the recent Mark Halperin incident shows that the White House is not only keeping a close eye as to what is being said on MSNBC, but that MSNBC is listening to what the White House says. It could be because they want more access to Obama and his staff, or simply because they support the far-left politics of this administration. Either way, it’s obvious to anyone who has spent any time watching MSNBC that they are in the tank for this White House. If anyone needs proof of this, I recommend that they visit NewsBusters.org and read some of the articles concerning MSNBC’s news coverage.
If this was about content or ratings, MSNBC wouldn’t have offered Cenk another position on their network. Keeping him as a contributor would allow MSNBC to control what Cenk said by choosing what discussions he could participate in. By replacing him with Al Sharpton, MSNBC still has a rabid far-left partisan, but one that will not be critical about Obama and the Democrats. Because of his name recognition, Sharpton might also give MSNBC a short-term ratings boost, but his controversial history and bigoted views will eventually turn off most viewers. As Larry Elder said this morning, Sharpton is the “black David Duke,” and I doubt most Americans will tolerate that kind of nonsense.
By replacing Cenk Ugyur with him, MSNBC goes from bad to worse. Despite how unwatchable Sharpton’s show will be, MSNBC now has someone hosting MSNBC Live that will not be even the least bit critical of President Obama. MSNBC’s “Lean Forward” has become a deep bow to a thin-skinned White House. Pathetc…
UPDATE: It appears that’s there far more to this story than I first believed. Larry O’Connor at BigJournalism.com has put up a post pointing out that Al Sharpton was crucial in bringing about the Comcast/NBC merger.
…It’s not like Sharpton was an early champion for the mega-media-merger out of the kindness of his heart. His political organization National Action Network (NAN) has received $190,000 since 2009, when the merger was first announced.
Also, Sharpton and NAN ferociously fought on behalf of James Clyburn in his struggle to retain a leadership position in the House when the Democrats were consigned to the minority earlier this year. The Democratic leadership created a position called “Assistant Minority Leader” so that he could retain the #3 position, something that does not usually exist for the minority party in the House. Subsequently, Comcast has donated over $10,000 to Rep. Clyburn’s political committees further assisting the father of the key FCC vote in favor of the merger, Mignon Clyburn.
Criticism is pouring in from left-leaning publications who realize this move doesn’t pass the smell test…
I recommend my modest readership give O’Connor’s post a read as it’s very enlightening.
Would it surprise anyone if this hosting job was payment for Sharpton’s work in assisting with the Comcast/NBC merger? I doubt it. Sharpton is far from a morally upstanding individual, so it wouldn’t surprise anyone if his support for the mega-merger came with a such a price. Does that mean Cenk Uygur was wrong for believing that Sharpton got his job because he wouldn’t criticize President Barack Obama? Not at all. MSNBC was looking for someone to replace Sharpton with and the White House expressed concern over some of Cenk’s comments.
While this explains is why Al Sharpton was at the top of the list for a hosting position at MSNBC, I am still convinced that Cenk Uygur was replaced because he dared to criticize the thin-skinned President. Pathetic…
This post put on the back burner for a while for a number of reasons, including my scholarly commitments, so please forgive the references to events that occurred last December as recent.
*****
I was checking my blog the other night when I saw a hit from a comment I made on a piece from another blog, Wallwritings, over a year ago. I criticized James M. Wall’s post because not only did he perpetuate the false belief espoused by columnist Andrew Sullivan and President Barack Obama that Winston Churchill didn’t allow the torture of prisoners during World War II (both Jonah Goldberg at Real Clear Politics and Robert Siegel at National Public Radio disprove this claim), but because he demanded that we not resort to any form of enhanced interrogation to get information for terrorists for moral reasons, citing the famous speech by Sir Thomas More in A Man For All Seasons to bolster his hollow argument.
WILLIAM ROPER: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
SIR THOMAS MORE: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
ROPER: I’d cut down every law in England to do that!
MORE: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned ’round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man’s laws, not God’s! And if you cut them down, and you’re just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I’d give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety’s sake!
As shown in its full context, More wasn’t discussing whether or not enhanced interrogations were torture and whether or not it was legal. He was talking about the importance of maintaining the integrity of “Man’s Laws” and not falsely imprisoning those who haven’t committed crimes. Aside from misleading his readers on the opinion of these two historical figures on corporal punishment, Wall wanted people to believe that maintain our morality was paramount, and that “taking shortcuts that “undermine who we are” takes us in the wrong direction.” To put it bluntly, we’re better than them and must always behave as such.
The talking point has been repeated over and over again by those who have problems not only accepting that we are at war with Islamic terrorists, but have issues with using any means available to get information which will save lives. Most recently, ‘The Young Turk’s’ Cenk Uygur repeated it when he anchored for MSNBC the other week. While discussing the Ahmed Ghailani verdict, he stated that the “Foopie’s” acquittal on more than 280 charges should be celebrated as it shows that “our justice system worked” because “We just gave this guy, who we believe helped to kill 224 people, a fair trial.” What was Cenk’s argument for giving Ghailani a civilian trial? As I pointed out in my article about this verdict, he incorrectly points to the Nuremberg Trials, military tribunals, and states that America and her allies gave prominent members of the political, military, and economic leadership of the defeated Nazi Germany “fair” civilian trials. Not only were they not civilian trials, but many historians and legal minds of the time considered them far from “fair.” As Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court Harlan Fiske Stone wrote, “I don’t mind what he does to the Nazis, but I hate to see the pretense that he is running a court and proceeding according to common law. This is a little too sanctimonious a fraud to meet my old-fashioned ideas.” What does all this mean though? Let me explain.
Why is there this obsession with our own conduct? Those who compare us to terrorists do so because of their hatred for the Western world which they justify by pointing to what we have done in the past. I am not here to argue whether or not certain actions, like the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki are morally right or wrong. The issue is what were our motives for these actions. Unlike those these people would compare us to, we do not have a desire to inflict pain and suffering, nor do we rejoice when we cause the deaths of civilians. These offenses are either accidental, like the shooting down of Iran Air Flight 655, or are done out of perceived necessity. Returning to Stone’s comment about the Nuremberg Trials, it was important that the Nazi leadership be punished for their crimes. It might not have been “fair,” but it was necessary in order to bring peace and stability back to war-torn Europe. Being better doesn’t mean that we cannot take certain courses of action. If necessity demands that we use less than desirable means to acquire information which will save lives, we do so. Since when is this perceived morality worth even one life?
Aside from our motivations, what else sets us apart from terrorists? Why not ask what is similar about us? Are we driven by an outdated, intolerant and violent ideology? Do our societies oppress ethnic and religious minorities? Do we mistreat our women and deny them equal status? The answer to all these questions is no. There was a time long since past when these might have been true, but not now. Unlike these barbarians, the Western world has moved well beyond our beginnings and become the standard by which other countries are judged. This is where this comparison falls apart. These people who are obsessed with our conduct would have you believe that any immoral act on our part would undo all that we have accomplished. Returning to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, what was the result of these actions? Japanese brutal campaign in the Pacific ended, possibly saving hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives in the process. Following their surrender, the United States invested heavily in the reconstruction of Japan. Americans didn’t loot the country, nor did they enslave its citizens as these barbarians have done for centuries, cannibalizing the countries of the Middle East.
Being “better” doesn’t mean being passive. It does mean a reasonable level of restraint, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t take an action which might not be wholly moral. We don’t live in a world where we have the luxury to act on principle alone. This is something that Sir Thomas More and Sir Winston Churchill understood. If those on the left are incapable of understanding this, as Cenk Uygur, Andrew Sullivan and James M. Wall are, then their disapproval should be simply ignored. As the least, it doesn’t help further our position in the world. In fact much of their criticism provides support for those who have shown through their actions that they are not our equal.
Simply put, we are better than them, and don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.
If you haven’t already heard, Ahmed Ghailani, accused of plotting with an al-Qaeda cell to kill US citizens in the attacks on the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which killed 224 people, including 12 Americans, was acquitted on all but one of the charges yesterday by a civilian court in New York. This from The Telegraph’s Jon Swaine.
In a blow to the Obama administration, Ahmed Ghailani, a 36-year-old Tanzanian, was on Wednesday night cleared by a jury in New York of 276 counts of murder and attempted murder and five counts of conspiracy.
He was convicted of just one charge of conspiring to damage or destroy American property with an explosive device, but still faces at least 20 years in prison.
Ghailani had been accused of plotting with an al-Qaeda cell to kill US citizens in the attacks on the embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which killed 224 people, including 12 Americans.
A spokesman said the Department of Justice was “pleased that Ahmed Ghailani now faces a minimum of 20 years in prison and a potential life sentence for his role in the embassy bombings.”
However the verdict was viewed as a setback to the plan by Barack Obama, the US President, to try alleged terrorists, including the self-proclaimed ringleader of the 9/11 attacks, in civilian courts…
While his lawyer, Peter Quijano, might view this as a legal triumph, many Americans, especially the victims’ families, view this as an example of how inadequate civilian courts are to try terrorists. This also appears not be the verdict of a “courageous jury,” but one deadlocked because of a single holdout who refused to follow the rest of the jury and convict Ghailani on all charges. This from talk radio host and Townhall.com columnist Hugh Hewitt.
An email from an individual very experienced in federal criminal proceedings comments:
This smells like a compromise verdict to me. On Monday you had the report that a juror asked to be excused, claiming she was the lone holdout and she feared continuing verbal assaults on her by the other jurors for refusing to agree with them.
I suspect the 11 jurors wanted to convict on all counts, and this one juror refused.
In order to reach a verdict, the 11 jurors agreed to join her in acquitting him on all counts but one, in exchange for her agreeing to convict him on the one count — which sounds the least serious based on its description in the indictment.
But, the potential sentence for that count is a minimum of 20 years and a maximum of life. Its up to the district judge to determine how much time he will give him, and the judge can consider all the evidence at trial, including the evidence on the acquitted counts.
To take those counts into consideration in determining what sentence to impose, the judge is only required to find by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant was involved in the criminal conduct for which he was acquitted. He’s not being punished for the acquitted conduct, rather, that conduct is to inform the judge about the nature of the defendant’s character.
I expect the judge will give him life when all is said and done.
It doesn’t surprise me that one juror, unable to let go social and political biases, couldn’t vote to convict this terrorist, despite the overwhelming evidence against him. This verdict does seem more symbolic then anything else as the one charge that Ghailani was found guilty on could put him away for the rest of his life. Charles Krauthammer pointed this out last night on Fox News with Bret Baier.
Seeing that the judge had to explain what was meant by being involved in a conspiracy, it is clear that this jury, or at least this single juror, wasn’t capable of realizing the implication of a conviction on this charge alone. As Krauthammer pointed out, if Ghailani’s defense is that he didn’t know he was involved, and that is found to be false, how could you then find him not guilty of being part of the conspiracy he was part of? This highlights one of the many problems with civilian courts for trying terrorists.
This isn’t simply a blow to Barack Obama and Eric Holder’s desire to try other terrorists in civilian courts, but it is a blow to the credibility of both men. As Hot Air’s Allahpundit points out, this fiasco will most likely put an end to this push for further civilian trials. Not only were there problems bringing certain evidence to trial, which is partly to blame for this fiasco, but then you have political fallout if a high-ranking al-Qaeda member like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) is brought to trial and found not guilty because of a small technicality or, as it seems in this case, a single juror unwilling to bring themselves to vote for a conviction. Return to what Krauthammer said last night of Fox News, this verdict demonstrates the incompetence of the Obama administration which decided that civilian trials would be preferable to trying these terrorists in military courts. While there are those in this administration and the media which will either tout this verdict as a success or blame former President George W. Bush for its failure, as Doug Powers pointed out, this trial and the resulting fiasco could have been avoided.
It is clear now that this course of action was a failure, and while this will most likely prevent other civilian trials, it demonstrates that there is a problem at the Department of Justice (DOJ) with Eric Holder. Aside from Hugh Hewitt, many others, including Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey, are saying that it is time for him to step down. It is his incompetence, his and Obama’s desire to grant this terrorist a civilian trial, which has created this fiasco. As Morrissey points out, at the least, Ghailani will be serving twenty years, minus time already served, for the murder of over two hundred people which he himself confessed to. The Obama administration cannot allow this verdict to stand without taking a serious political damage, so it is either has to throw out the conviction and hold Ghailani indefinitely, which they are expected to do with KSM, or hold him and let this next administration make the decision. Either way, Holder’s incompetence on this will most likely cost him his position at the DOJ.
To think that it took one juror to do what no amount of conservative bloggers could, halt Barack Obama’s agenda and bring down Eric Holder. This decision would almost be something to celebrate if not for the fact that Ahmed Ghailani, a man responsible for the deaths of over two hundred people, was acquitted of most of the charges against him.
UPDATE:Alex Fitzsimmons at NewsBusters.org is reporting on Cenk Ugyur’s opinion on the Ahmed Ghailani verdict. While anchoring for MSNBC today, the host of ‘The Young Turks’ said that “our justice system worked” because “We just gave this guy, who we believe helped to kill 224 people, a fair trial.” He then goes on to cite the Nuremberg Trials, a series of military tribunals as an example of “fair” civilian trials. Aside from being historically ignorant, Uygur demonstrated, as Fitzsimmons stated, his warped view of reality. I doubt Sue Bartley, who’s husband and son were killed in the 1998 United States embassy bombing in Kenya, shares his belief that Ghailani’s verdict is something to be celebrated.
…Are things in our country so bad that it might actually be time for a revolution? The answer obviously is yes, the only question is how to do it…
What really surprised me about this was Ratigan’s matter-of-fact assertion that things in America had become so bad, that it was time for a violent revolution. This to seems to me to be a response to last week’s midterm election results. With the vast majority of Americans rejecting Barack Obama’s “hyper-liberalism,” it would seem Ratigan and the far-left are considering taking up arms to force through their radical agenda. It isn’t like it is only Ratigan and Rall who have proposed this. Recently, Ana Kasparian of ‘The Young Turks’ (TYT) was applauding the rioters in France for their violent tactics. It should also come as no surprise that TYT’s Cenk Uygur is a frequent guest on Ratigan’s show and has hosted it in the past.
We are here because the U.S. is going to end soon. There’s going to be an intense, violent, probably haphazard struggle for control. It’s going to come down to us versus them. The question is: What are you going to do about it?…
Christian fundamentalists, the millennial end-of-theworlders obsessed with the Left Behind series about the End Times, neo-Nazi racists, rural black-helicopter Michigan Militia types cut from the same inbred cloth as Timothy McVeigh, allied with “mainstream” gun nuts and right-wing Republicans, have been planning, preparing, and praying for the destruction of the “Godless,” “secular” United States for decades. In the past, they formed groups like the John Birch Society and the Aryan Nations. Now the hard Right has a postmodern, decentralized non-organization organization called the Tea Party.
Right-wing organizational names change, but they amount to the same thing: the reactionary sociopolitical force—the sole force—poised to fill the vacuum when collapse occurs. The scenario outlined by Margaret Atwood’s prescient novel The Handmaid’s Tale—rednecks in the trenches, hard military men running things, minorities and liberals taken away and massacred, setting the stage for an even more extreme form of laissez-faire corporate capitalism than we’re suffering under today—is a fair guess of how a post-U.S. scenario will play out unless we prepare to turn it in another direction…
A war is coming. At stake: our lives, the planet, freedom, living. The government, the corporations, and the extreme right are prepared to coalesce into an Axis of Evil. Are you going to fight back? Will you do whatever it takes, including taking up arms?…
The millions of partisans who follow Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and right-wing televangelists happen to be the best-armed people around, and they despise just about everyone who doesn’t think and pray like them. They will see collapse as affirmation of their beliefs that secular liberalism is destructive. They will also see it as an opportunity to create a new, ordered world atop the ashes. They will act to stop teenage sluts from getting abortions, teach niggers a lesson, and slaughter those spics, dots, and everyone else who doesn’t fit into their vision of what and who is right…
I want to kick people in the ass. To get them thinking. To get you thinking. I want you to understand the situation—your situation. I want you to see that revolt is a good idea, and that it has never been more necessary. I also want you to size up the opposition (both the government and 28 The Anti-American Manifesto the extreme right): They will never get weaker. We have as good a chance at taking them on as ever.
As Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey points out, Ratigan seems rather intrigued by Rall’s desire for an armed revolution. Instead of pressing him some of the points the political cartoonist raised, the MSNBC host seemed rather content in providing his show as a platform to espouse the violent overthrow of America. Weren’t Chris Matthewsand Rachel Maddow falsely claiming that Sharron Angle was trying to pushing for the same with her comment on “Second Amendment Remedies”? Knowing how hypocritical those two are, I doubt they would have the decency to call out Ratigan and Rall for their comments on violent revolution. So it is okay for the left but the right can’t even making passing references to it? This is what viewers have come to expect from MSNBC.
Forget grief councilors for Democrat staffers, I think MSNBC hosts, contributors and guests need psychiatric help if when this nonsense goes unchallenged. Dylan Ratigan and Ted Rall come off as crazed militiamen, the type they would paint their critics as, for having such a candid conversation about the need for a violent revolution. As hard as these try, it would appear that left are the ones looking at “Second Amendment Remedies” to force through a political agenda that just last week was rejected by the vast majority of Americans.
UPDATE: Just because Dylan Ratigan and Ted Rall are dangerously delusional, it doesn’t mean we can’t laugh at their lunacy. Here’s Greg Gutfeld from Fox News’ ‘Red Eye’ with his opinion on the political cartoonist’s desire for violent revolution.
“Creeping genocide”? If I did take Ed Shultz and Jesse Jackson seriously before watching this, I couldn’t anymore. Even lacking an ounce of credibility, these two have found a way to lose what little they had left… Pathetic…
I have a problem with people who have this knee-jerk reaction to events regarding Israel. I might not approve of everything the Jewish state does, but seeing how Canada isn’t under the constant threat of attack, I understand that I may not fully understand why certain things are done. Extreme as certain actions may be, to the Israeli people, at the very least, they are justified. Suffice to say, I am far more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, especially when they have the facts on their side…
As Shraga Simmons from MediaGoliath points out in this video, even with the evidence clearly supporting the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) story, you have individuals who will purposely it. It conflicts with their “Arabs are good, Israelis are bad” unreality, a twisted version of events which these bigots find comfort in believing. Why is it comfortable? Anti-semitism isn’t only acceptable, it is fashionable. These bigots are celebrated for espousing hatred towards Jews and the Jewish state. Case in point; Cenk Uygur’s latest column at the Huffington Post, “Israeli Defense Forces Execute American Citizen”. While Furkan Dogan was born in the United States (Troy, New York), he moved to Turkey when he was two and had since become radicalized. We have seen this with Omar Khadr, the Canadian-born teenager who has been accused of war crimes for throwing a grenade which killed U.S. Army Medic Christopher James Speer. Citizenship should not excuse this kind of radical behaviour, nor should it be used to shield individuals from the repercussions of their acts. Furkan Dogan, along with the other passengers on the Mavi Marmara, attacked IDF soldiers with clubs and knives. He wasn’t a victim, but a casualty of a conflict he and the other Islamic radicals from the Islan Haklary Ve Hurriyetleri Vakfi (IHH) started. It was far from an “execution” Cenk, especially with the video evidence demonstrating how violent these “peaceful protesters” were. Honestly, if I was one of those IDF soldiers who was being beaten and stabbed, I would have kept firing my sidearm until I knew my attacker was dead. It is a survival instinct, a natural reaction to a perceived threat, something Cenk has purposely ignore with his latest post. His anti-Jewish bigotry is on full display, but not only his…
Helen Thomas, as known as “Hamas Helen”, has been calling this event a “deliberate massacre”. We all know the facts of the event on the Mavi Marmara, we know the IHH were armed and ready for the IDF, so it was far from a “deliberate massacre”, but this gargoyle wants that because of her hatred from the Jewish people. Her anti-semitism is well know, but for those who still don’t understand just how much of a Jew-hater she is, here’s video, thanks to Hot Air’s Allahpundit, of her uglier side. As if she wasn’t gruesome enough…
Jews go back to Europe? That is akin to telling Muslims to go back to the Middle East, or Black to go back to Africa. It is hard to deny, especially after seeing that, that Helen Thomas is a hateful racist. There isn’t much else that can be said about this gargoyle considering she has a long history of anti-semitism. As I stated previously, these incidents bring out the bigots. One only has to look to the Youtube comments for this video to see this…
helpendthefed – End of Zionism = Peace
telsa121 – GOD bless Helen Thomas!
sheLovesG – One of the last true journalists. God bless Helen Thomas.
NowSwimBack3 – Nice attempt at misrepresenting the facts. So Jewish of you! And you wonder why Jews have been thrown out of every nation they’ve been inside? The nations of the world have a very low tolerance for hateful liars and cheaters as the Jews are.
Antisemitism is a disease.
You catch it from Jews.
telesniper2 – Where is the proof of this six million? The Red Cross cites 600,000 perished. Many gentiles perished also (I, know, the Talmud considers their lives the equivalent of insects, but you jews should try to show some consideration for once). Yet the Jews claim they were “disproportionately persecuted, along with gays, gypsies, etc”. Where is the the Gay Homeland, or the Gypsy Homeland then? We should carve up Israel to create them!
vtcpdx – Too bad the Romans didn’t finish them off. Funny how Jews keep getting kicked out of country after country and always play the martyr. Maybe it’s their idiotic superiority complex that is causing them grief professor Jackass.
There is much more there, but I feel this is enough to prove my point. While the first few quotes aren’t blatantly anti-semitic, they are just as hateful. These are all the writings of people who not only support Helen Thomas, but agree with the gargoyle’s beliefs on Israel. Even with the videos of the “peaceful protesters” attacking the IDF soldiers with clubs and knives, these very individuals will find ways to blame everything on Israel. While these very people will brand Israel’s supporters are racist, it is plain to see who is really “wearing the white hood”…
Even with the facts known, it is difficult to get these bigots to not only acknowledge the evidence, but admit they were wrong. Ignorance is definitely not bliss, especially when it perpetuates hate… Pathetic…
Jew-hating is popular, especially right now, and while very few would openly support Helen Thomas’ statement, I doubt she will be punished for it. This gargoyle will still be invited to all the important events, and when the lights and cameras are turned off, she will be applauded for her “courage”… Disgusting…
UPDATE: I really don’t know what to think of this video. mikejmon333 at Youtube posted it, and it is downright disturbing. I can only describe this as mind-bogglingly offensive…
“Go back to Auschwitz“? “We’re helping Arabs go against the US, don’t forget 9-11 guys”? The first is downright racist while the second is downright stupid. A perfect example of how hatred for the Jews comes from the dumbest of people… Pathetic…
Hearst Corporation has announced that Helen Thomas will retire. Am I wrong for saying previously that she wouldn’t be punished for these remarks? Perhaps, but note that she has retired, not been fired. When this incident is long forgotten, all that will be remembered is that this gargoyle retired after decades of journalistic “excellence” (and I use that term as loosely as possible in this context). The Hearst Corporation gave her an out, allowing Thomas to preserve her what was left of her reputation without having “fired in disgrace” permanently etched on her resume. Dan Rather would have begged on his hands and knees to be given the same opportunity… Pathetic…
UPDATE:Michelle Malkin is blogging on Helen Thomas’ retirement from a different angle. It is hard not to think about the Holocaust. I have a hard time believing this gargoyle could forget the millions of Jews who were murdered by the Nazi. Matter of fact, one might wonder if it isn’t because of the “Final Solution” that those who are anti-Israel would say such things, especially considering what was demonstrated in mikejmon333′s video with the “Go back to Auschwitz” quote. While I am certainly not a Thomas fan, I am willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on this one. Prior to the Second World War, a fair number of Jewish people within Europe lived in Germany and Poland, so maybe that is what she meant with her comments. It would be awful to think that Thomas’ peers would have tolerated anyone with a “Go back to Auschwitz” mentality as long as the gargoyle has been a member of the White House Press Corps.
Seeing how Reuters has a history of publishing the stories presented to them by terrorist groups, it is obvious that the news organization has been infiltrated by pro-Palestinian/anti-Israeli (if not anti-semitic) individuals who are letting their beliefs get in the way of the facts… Pathetic…
