I am downright disgusted with the way the media has been reporting the terrorist attacks in Oslo, Norway. While reporters have downplayed, if not ignored acts of Islamic terrorism, they have been gleefully reporting that Anders Behring Breivik was some sort of Christian conservative terrorist. Out of all media outlets pushing this nonsense, This anti-Christian and anti-conservative bias demonstrates the lack of journalistic integrity of those pushing baseless nonsense. There are, however, those in media who aren’t willing to use this tragedy to push their political beliefs. Thanks to SDAMatt2, we have video of SunTV’s Charles Adler, Ezra Levant and Michael Coren speaking out against this anti-Christian narrative (hat-tip Blazing Cat Fur).
As outlined by all these commentators, Breivik is neither a Christian nor a conservative. Aside from the fact that he admitted that he hasn’t been to church in fifteen years, Breivik also admits that he doesn’t have a special relationship with Jesus Christ and God. How can one not have this relationship and still be considered a Christian? It is a key tenet of Christianity, especially fundamentalist Christianity. To Breivik, to be a Christian, one just has to be non-Muslim and living in the Western world. How is it possible that those in the media can ignore these statements and continue to claim that this deranged individual represents Christianity? It’s downright dishonest and irresponsible, but that doesn’t matter to far-left political partisans who have an agenda to push.
I could continue and discuss why this deranged individual isn’t a conservative, but I made that point in my previous post. If anything, this tragedy has exposed the anti-Christian and anti-conservative bias of the media. If these so-called “journalists” weren’t too busy gleefully pushing this nonsense, they would realize that the facts concerning Anders Behring Breivik and his actions don’t support their narrative. Pathetic…
The breaking news is that Osama bin Laden, terrorist mastermind has been confirmed dead. Here’s the CNN footage of Barack Obama’s announcement via SDAMatt2.
What did happened? Thanks to bloggers like Hot Air’s Allahpundit, we now know a lot more now than we did when the announcement was made. Contrary to popular and widely held belief, bin Laden wasn’t hiding in a cave, but living in a compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. This begs the question, how much assistance did the Pakistanis give the terrorist leader? If this administration knows, they aren’t telling. As indicated by last night’s address, the White House is treating Pakistan as an ally who assisted them in this endeavor. Doing otherwise could create a international incident, especially since former Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf,are saying this operation violated the sovereignty of Pakistan. Here’s a video clip via John Sexton at Hot Air.
…One detainee, Saber Lal Melma, an Afghan whom the US described as a probable facilitator for al-Qaeda, allegedly worked with the ISID to help members flee Afghanistan after the American bombing began in October 2001.
His US military Guantanamo Bay detainee file, obtained by Wikileaks and seen by The Daily Telegraph, claims he allegedly passed the al-Qaeda Arabs to Pakistani security forces who then smuggled them across the border into Pakistan.
He was also overheard “bragging about a time when the ISID sent a military unit into Afghanistan, posing as civilians to fight along side the Taliban against US forces”…
Could it be that this was simply a radical faction within the ISI? Maybe, but Pakistan will have to explain why bin Laden was found in a secure compound in Abbottabad.
It was during the previous administration that the key intelligence, more specifically the name of Osama’s courier, for this operation was gained. Does this mean a change in this administration’s counter terrorism strategy? Maybe, but I doubt it. That would require, at the least, an acknowledgement of the success of the Bush administration’s policies, and I don’t see this White House doing that.
What does this mean for the War on Terror? Not much. The truth is that bin Laden has been little more than a figurehead for the last few years. It is good that he has finally been killed, but his death doesn’t mark the end of al-Qaeda, let alone Islamic terrorism. The one who has been organizing the latest string of attacks was Anwar al-Awlaki, the al-Qaeda leader based in Yemen. If the United States was able to get him as well, then we might see, at the least, a significant short-term drop in terrorist activities. So what’s the benefit of killing bin Laden then? The most important benefit is that it reminds terrorist leaders that no matter where they hide, they will be found and brought to justice. Could this lead to a temporary drop in terrorist activities? Perhaps, but that has yet to be seen. We will have to wait and see what impact, in any, bin Laden’s death will have on both al-Qaeda and Islamic terrorism.
What does this mean for Obama? Depends who you talk to. Democrats will claim that their weak and confused approach worked. If they had their way, the Guantanmo Bay detention facility, along with the secret CIA prisons, would have been closed. Republicans on the other hand will correctly point out that it was under George W. Bush that Osama was forced from Afghanistan, where he could no longer command his followers, and it was Bush policies that Obama continued that led to this victory. Does that mean Obama doesn’t deserve credit? Of course not. Despite past statements and his harsh criticism of the previous administration’s handling of the War on Terror, Obama showed real leadership in allowing this operation to go ahead. He gave this mission the go ahead knowing that many of his supporters would attack him for not only violating the sovereignty of Pakistan, but ordering the execution of a terrorist leader. That won’t sit well with the radical anti-war left, led by Cindy Sheehan, who doesn’t believe Osama is actually dead (hat-tip to Hot Air’s Jazz Shaw).
As for the inevitable question about how this will help Obama’s re-election chances, it’s unsure. In my opinion, Osama’s death is little more than a political achievement for a failing president. With the economy still struggling to recover and gas prices spiking, it’s unlikely voters will re-elect Obama because of this achievement. Let’s not forget that George H.W. Bush soundly defeated Saddam Hussein in the First Gulf War, only to be defeated by Bill Clinton in the 1992 presidential election. There will be a bounce in his approval ratings, as the polls are showing now (hat-tip to Karl at Hot Air), but it will only be temporary as bin Laden’s death will be of little comfort to voters looking to pay the bills. This may win him a few votes come the next presidential election, but far from the amount needed to secure a second term.
In the end, this is very much a hallow victory. It is an important achieve for the War on Terror, but not as important as many would believe. Osama bin Laden will be replaced and the terrorist campaign against the West will continue. The United States and its allies must remain vigilant and not naively believe that this marks the end of the War on Terror. This was only one battle in the never-ending war against Islamic extremism.
SunTV broke this story yesterday on New Democratic Party (NDP) Leader Jack Layton’s exploits at a well-known bawdy house during his time as Toronto City Councilor. Thanks to SDAMatt2 for the video (hat-tip Blazing Cat Fur).
And here’s Jack Layton’s respond to this story.
Not really a response at all actually. It’s a dodge. In my opinion, his dishonesty pretty much confirms police suspicions about what occurred. Instead of answering the question posed to him by reporters, he changes topics and attacks the nature of politics. Says a lot about the man who seems set on leading the opposition, if not a coalition government.
So what should be taken away from this story? Not much. It damages Jack’s credibility, but considering that this man is leading the NDP, it isn’t like he had much credibility to begin with. I mean, how can anyone take you seriously with the kind of candidates your party is running? I mean, aside from Libby Davies.
I can see disheartened Liberals refusing to vote NDP over this story, but not much else. Actually, considering former President Bill Clinton’s popularity, ill-informed and immoral youth might actually vote for Jack because of this past indiscretion.
The real question raised by this story is why did it take sixteen years for this incident to come to light? Surely NDP insiders knew of this past discretion, but why was it SunTV that broke this story? I think it speaks to the quality (or lack thereof) of journalism in this country. According to Blazing Cat Fur Andre Coyne of Maclean’s Magazine, as well as others in the media, knew of this story months ago (hat-tip Five Feet of Fury). So why wasn’t it reported? While I might not be a devoted follower of the station, SunTV has demonstrated with this story that they are needed to report on news other media outlets refuse to due to their political biases.
Liberal Party supporters will be happy with the release of this story. It might just be enough to keep them as the official opposition. With this incident now made public, they could only hope that it spreads fast enough and far enough to change their party’s political fortunes. Is it possible? Maybe, but this story might have come out too late to have any significant impact on predicted election results.
We’ll see come Monday, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this loses NDP much needed votes in some of the closer races. As Kathy Shaidle of Five Feet of Fury said, talk of an NDP election win could just be another case of premature Jack Layton.
The Velvet Touch Massage parlour — where Jack Layton was found during a 1996 police visit — was suspected by himself and others to be a rub and tug since it opened, Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti says.
The massage parlour at 787 Dundas St. W., which ceased operations shortly after the police came calling, opened in 1994 and was among 26 suspected bawdy houses Toronto Police cracked down on with more than 300 charges.
Layton has denied any wrongdoing and said he did not know it was a suspected bawdy house…
…As for his thoughts on Layton being caught in the room with an attractive 5-foot-10 Asian woman, he’s not really buying that the NDP leader didn’t know it was a place where he could get sexual services.
“He’s claiming he got a legitimate massage, but the issue here is it’s clear it was a rub and tug and most people in society would know that when they go in. I’d be very surprised that a very smart politician would not have known … and Jack was very smart.”
The Velvet Touch doesn’t sound like a “community clinic” at all. How many “community clinics” are suspected of underage prostitution? The more we hear about the it and what is suspected to have occurred there, the more damning this story becomes. I don’t know how anyone who cares about women’s rights, let alone self-proclaimed feminists, could support a man who frequented a massage parlour suspected of sex trafficking of young girls.
“Jack the John” Layton literally got caught with his pants down and now, with a day left in this campaign, the NDP and its supporters are lashing out, calling this story an unsubstantiated smear. Hopefully Canadians are smart enough to to understand that just because charges weren’t laid, doesn’t mean a crime didn’t occur.
I haven’t been doing much blogging with final exams, but now that they’re over, I figured that I would get back to doing what I enjoy. The issue that got me writing today was SunTV’s Theo Caldwell and his guest Michael Coren, the host of ‘The Michael Coren Show’, bashing Sarah Palin during a discussion about the Middle East. Thanks to SDAMatt2 for the video clip.
How do Coren’s comments about the history of the term “blood libel” prove that he is smarter than Sarah Palin? It doesn’t. This doesn’t show anything but their political leanings, but let’s humour these two twits for a few minutes.
Stupidity is defined as “a lack of intelligence, understanding, reason, wit, or sense.” The lack of understanding is what we’re looking at here, particularly the context in which the term “blood libel” was used. Following the shootings in Tucson, Arizona, Sarah Palin, along with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, etc were blamed for the actions of Jared Lee Loughner. After numerous statements by members of the press that Sarah had “blood on her hands,” she responded and correctly stated that her detractors were manufacturing a “blood libel” against her. Why was she correct? Let’s take a step back to examine the term itself.
…The term blood libel has taken on a broad metaphorical meaning in public discourse. Although its historical origins are rooted in theologically based false accusations against the Jewish people and individual Jews, its current usage is far broader. I myself have used it to describe what I believe to be false accusations against the state of Israel by the Goldstone report. The fact that two of the victims are Jewish is irrelevant to the propriety of using this widely-referenced term…
…Sarah Palin was accused of being responsible for the death and wounding of multiple human beings. She reasonably believes that accusation to be false in fact and politically inspired. She is entitled, in my view, to use the term “blood libel” in the context of an accusation of responsibility for bloodletting, without regard to the religion or ethnicity of the perpetrator, the victims, the accusers or the accused…
The question is whether or not Coren truly understood the context of Palin’s comments. Surely he couldn’t be so petty as to constantly find excuses to assert his belief that the former Alaskan governor is an intellectual inferior, could he? I have sent him a few e-mails in the past, one with a link to Alan Dershowitz’s article, but he hasn’t replied to me nor made an effort to apologize for his mistakes on his show. I guess Michael isn’t the courageous intellectual he would have his audience believe.
As for Caldwell, what can I say? He spent a part of yesterday’s show admitting his mental deficiency, so I don’t see the point in spending anymore time to prove his stupidity. I’m not a fan of Caldwell nor his politics. It’s only been two days the start of his show, ‘The Caldwell Account’ on SunTV and I have lost interest in anything he or his guests have to say. Be it his childish antics when introducing guests, his inability to maintain composure, or his uneducated and ill-conceived opinions on issues like American politics, he isn’t worth watching. It’s almost like he and his show are the personification of the myths and lies spread by the left about Fox News. Even on their worst days, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity are far more professional than this twit.
In the end, this nonsense not only speaks volumes about Theo Caldwell and Michael Coren, but it also says a lot about SunTV. The left is always criticized for its dedication to a group of intellectual elites, but that doesn’t mean the right is lacks a similar intelligentsia. These are the pseudo-conservative pundits, like David Frum who believe themselves better than anyone who doesn’t share their educational pedigree or upbringing. This is where this hatred of Sarah Palin and other like her comes from on the right. People like Sarah haven’t achieved fame and political power as these elites have, and their ability to connect and rally the conservative base scares them. Instead of emulating Palin, instead of sticking to core conservative principles, they would prefer to brand her and others like her as “stupid” and “radical” to appease their left-leaning colleagues. That demonstrates real stupidity.
If SunTV wants to claim it speaks for the average Canadian, Caldwell and Coren aren’t helping them. Such ill-informed pseudo-conservative nonsense demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of their audience. That’s real stupidity.
UPDATE: I want to add this video from uffdamega52. It’s a clip from Glenn Beck’s radio show discussing another book smearing Sarah Palin, but it’s the last minute of the segment which I want my modest readership to pay attention to.
It isn’t just Beck saying this. Mark Levin as well as many other conservative pundits have pointed out that Palin and others like her are a threat to their political power. This is the exact same nonsense we see when Theo Caldwell and Michael Coren take cheap shots at the former Alaskan governor.
I’m hoping this nonsense won’t be common as SunTV goes forward. If it is, I won’t be wasting my time watching it.
While I am thinking about whether or not to put up another post, I have to say that today’s episode of ‘The Michael Coren Show’ definitely covers all the important issues I wanted to raise. Thanks to SDAMatt2 for posting this video.
In this instance, Michael Coren, who’s not a fan, comes to the defense of Sarah Palin like Barbara Walters did today on ‘The View’ (hat-tip to Hot Air’s Allahpundit).Noel Sheppard has the full story and a clip from the segment on ‘The View’ if anyone is interested. I have to say that I am upset that it took such a tragedy to get them to come to Palin’s defense against a media which has done everything to demonize her. As Michelle Malkin stated last night on her blog, this is a continuing campaign to smear those on the right, a vicious campaign that has become very ugly in the last few years. I think Tarek Fatah should have given it a read before ranting about the whitewashing of the left’s involvement in tragedy. Same goes for his ignorant and hateful comments about the people of Arizona. If he is concerned with hateful rhetoric, he shouldn’t have made those comments.
As for the rest of the comments, as a Canadian, I don’t begrudge the gun culture of the United States. If we did carry firearms like they do in America, we might not have had the massacre at École Polytechnique, the tragedy briefly discussed on today’s show. This nonsense about the difference between our countries frustrates me as those who are obsessed with the idea that Canada and the United States are vastly different seem to forget centuries of shared history and an almost identical political and social culture. Let’s also not pretend that Canadian politics are anymore proper than American politics. Have we already forgotten Libby Davies’ rant about Israel?
In any event, this story is far from over. The weekend has just ended but it seems that the fallout from the shootings in Tucson, Arizona has just begun. Let’s remember that it is Jared Lee Loughner who committed this horrible act, not Sarah Palin nor anyone else on the right, and let’s also remember to pray for the victims of this horrible attack. That is what really matters, not trying to figure out who should be blamed for the actions of a deranged individual.
What did I say about Canadian politics being no different. This is the exact same approach Tarek Fatah took in condemning Sarah Palin for removing the much discussed crosshairs map from her website, that by defending themselves they are contributing to the problem. Huh? It doesn’t make sense, but this seems to be the newest line of attack on the former Alaskan Governor and those who share her political views.
In any event, I recommend my readership give Ed Morrissey’s post a read, especially since he also reports on the reaction by right-leaning pundits to Mark Halperin’s comments.
