I was talking with someone today and it brought up some thoughts so I thought I would share them with you.

Go get a history book and look back to when the USA was in the gloomiest times of World War II

We, the United States did what we needed to do. I was watching a show on Nazism in the USA. Did you know that in addition to the Japanese put in internment camps, there were 1000’s of Germans put into the same camps, and 1000’s of Italians too?

Well, it’s true.

The government of the USA did what it was supposed to do… what ANY responsible government will do… the utmost thing of importance of ANY government to it’s promise to it’s people…

No… not be politically correct. No… not hope our enemies will love us if we only would be more like them. No… not worry about if people around the world like us

The government took on the responsibility to uphold the country. To look out for the welfare of the people. To do what is best for the country Fuck the rest.

And the people respected and understood that. They trusted their government.

You will see, most of the people willingly made sacrifices. We were all in it together.

Rationing of gas. Steel pennies rather than copper because copper was needed for the war effort. Congress behind the president, not sniping and whining, praising the enemy and attacking those brave and thoughtful enough to put on a uniform of the US military and fight for us on our behalf. The press was not out taking potshots… actually calling the shots. We had real leaders then.

Captain America

Cartoonists created comic book heroes. Captain America… Superman… They took on the bad guys. They uplifted the spirits of the people of the USA.

So what has the wonderful elites in publishing — newspapers, magazines, TV news, radio news, and yes… comic books done?

They killed Captain America… They killed Superman!

Why? To discourage the people?… You decide.

All I know

All I know is I see a bunch of weak no backbone politicians on all sides. Spineless worms who if they saw a shadow would run from it. But still talk tough.

You know… the classic bully

They have no principles… except to get elected, and re-elected. Why? So they can get more and more ever expanding power. They think they can dictate to the world.

And Who is Controlling the Politicians?

Not you and me! Not the voters.

If it’s not the voters, who could it be?

Easy answer really… if you look carefully.

It’s the Mainstream Press

The NY Times with their “All the news that’s fit to print” theme. Of course they will print an editorial by Obama… their candidate of choice, and refuse to print one by McCain (frankly I don’t understand how either one could be the standard bearer for their respective parties. They are both inept, corrupt dirty and impressed by their own press clippings)

Obama goes overseas and the big three ABC, NBC, CBS send their nightly anchors to cover him, all swooning like little girls did when the Beatles first came to the USA. No coverage of McCain, or Bob Barr (Libertarian Party ), or Ralph Nader, or any of the other candidates. As if they didn’t exist.

Then the mainstream press self justifies their bias claiming it is not bias on their part.

It Amazes Me

It amazes me that the people elected to congress are so weak kneed, so spineless (there are a couple of exceptions to this rule, but not many) that seeing the overt bias and… dare I say it… prejudice of the mainstream press they still coddle up to them, doing the bidding of some jerk who just graduated journalism school or some over priced puff who talks tough (Dan Rather comes to mind), but falls over easily when pushed. And worst yet, these dolts, don’t live in the real world.

We’re the Press

“We’re the press” they say. As if that justifies anything. “We are supposed to be unbiased” they say. But they obviously are not. “We… the press… we know what’s best for the people… because we are the press.”

And these incompetents are leading the other incompetents who write and pass laws, and hope they will get some nice write up in the paper

I don’t know about you. But I am thoroughly disgusted.

###

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

Dear Reader and Friend,

Here in my opinion is a blatant propaganda piece masquerading as unbiased journalism. Frankly it disgusts me how so called journalists, get away with this crap all the time. It’s time we Critical Thinkers start to challenge these crap slingers, and their opinion pieces (editorials) masquerading as solid un-biased journalistic reporting. It’s time to call the propaganda what it is, an underhanded attempt to cause the masses to be brainwashed into the propagandists (reporters) beliefs.

Let’s start with the title of the alleged un-biased piece…

With science undisputed, climate bill opponents turn to cost

Biased? or un-biased?

So I will analyze the article for it’s propaganda, and make some editorial comments as well.

But First, let’s review the SEVEN Propaganda devices…

1. Color Red: Name Calling — generally used to giving an idea a bad label which is used to make us reject and condemn the idea without examining the evidence.
2. Color Gold: Glittering Generality — associating something with a “Virtue Word” (a word that has several meanings or can mean something good, or bad to the people who hear it but is not quantifiable e.g. freedom it sounds good, makes us feel good, but it means different things to different people.) A Glittering Generality is generally used to make us accept and approve an idea or thing without examining the evidence. Or reject and not approve an idea, or thing without examining the evidence.
3. Color Blue: Transfer — carries the authority, sanction, and prestige of something or someone respected and revered over to something or someone else in order to make the later acceptable; or it carries authority, sanction, and disapproval to cause us to reject and disapprove something the propagandist would have us reject and disapprove.
4. Color Maroon: Testimonial — this can either be telling a story of how someone or something got to this point, or it can be having a respected or hated person say a given idea, action, or person, or group is good or bad.
5. Color Tan: Plain Folks — is the method to make people feel the speaker or group the speaker represents is just like them “one of us” or the speaker attempts to convince his/her audience that he/she and his/her ideas are good because they are “of the people” the “plain folks”
6. Color Pink: Card Stacking — involves the selection and use of facts and half truths and even lies, illustrations, distractions, and logical or illogical statements in order to give the best or worst possible case for an idea, program, person, or product. Just keep piling on “evidence” in his/her favor.
7. Color Green: Band Wagon — “Everybody is doing it.” Or at least all of us are doing it. And with this thought and “proofs” the propagandist tries to convince us that all the members of the group we belong to or want to belong to accept his/her program and therefore we must follow the crowd and “jump on the bandwagon”

The article can be found at http://www.mcclatchydc.com/257/story/39908.html

It was dated: Posted on Wednesday, June 4, 2008

The byline is By Renee Schoof | McClatchy Newspapers

[Card Stacking combined with Out and out lying]With science undisputed, [Card Stacking alone] climate bill opponents turn to cost

WASHINGTON — Opponents of [Glittering Generality]landmark legislation that would cut greenhouse gas emissions have taken a new approach this week as the Senate began debate on what could eventually be a huge reordering of how the nation gets and uses energy.

[Editors Note: The writer/propagandist of this piece is trying to imply that any “landmark” legislation must be good]

[Name Calling] Instead of challenging [transfer]scientific evidence of a warming world[transfer ends], they’ve focused on costs.[name calling ends] In the end, these opponents say, consumers would be hurt.

[Editors Note: there is a group of 31,000 + scientists right here in the USA broken down in the following professions: as of 6/6/08 there are 31,072 petition signers includes 9,021 PhD; 6,961 MS; 2,240 MD and DVM; and 12,850 BS or equivalent academic degrees. Most of the MD and DVM signers also have underlying degrees in basic science. see Global Warming Petition Project

Outlined below are the numbers of Petition Project signatories, subdivided by educational specialties. These have been combined, as indicated, into seven categories.

1. Atmospheric, environmental, and Earth sciences includes 3,697 scientists trained in specialties directly related to the physical environment of the Earth and the past and current phenomena that affect that environment.
2. Computer and mathematical sciences includes 903 scientists trained in computer and mathematical methods. Since the human-caused global warming hypothesis rests entirely upon mathematical computer projections and not upon experimental observations, these sciences are especially important in evaluating this hypothesis.
3. Physics and aerospace sciences include 5,691 scientists trained in the fundamental physical and molecular properties of gases, liquids, and solids, which are essential to understanding the physical properties of the atmosphere and Earth.
4. Chemistry includes 4,796 scientists trained in the molecular interactions and behaviors of the substances of which the atmosphere and Earth are composed.
5. Biology and agriculture includes 2,924 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of living things on the Earth.
6. Medicine includes 3,069 scientists trained in the functional and environmental requirements of human beings on the Earth.
7. Engineering and general science includes 9,992 scientists trained primarily in the many engineering specialties required to maintain modern civilization and the prosperity required for all human actions, including environmental programs.

All signed a petition that states:

“We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the earth.”

All 31,072 scientists signed this very statement.]

[Card Stacking] ”One huge change from previous debates is that only one person has raised a question that (global warming) is a problem,“[end card stacking] [transfer]said Manik Roy of the Pew Center on Climate Change, which works with large businesses.[end of transfer] ”The No. 1 thing to me is that it’s talk about how to solve it rather than whether to solve the problem.“

Under the global warming bill, or [glittering generality] Climate Security Act,[end of glittering generality] it would no longer be free for factories or power plants to emit carbon dioxide and other global warming gases into the atmosphere. Fees would be levied to curb such [name calling]pollution.[end name calling]

It’s not expected the bill will become law this year. President Bush has said he’d veto it if it passes. But with the presidential candidates supporting some version of the bill’s main ideas, it’s widely thought that emissions controls will be put in place in a year or so. For that reason, the debate now offers a hint of opposition to come.

Senators opposing the bill this week warned that the legislation could make the cost of gas go up. They’ve cited an EPA study that said that the bill could raise prices 53 cents a gallon over 22 years, or 2 cents a year, from 2008 to 2030.

[Editor's Note: What just 2 cents a year. Why we could afford that (said sarcastically)]

[Band Wagon] Several senators —Republicans Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Judd Gregg of New Hampshire — said they agreed with the concept of limiting emissions and charging a fee for polluting, but wanted different ways to use the proceeds or a program on a smaller scale. Sen. John McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has said he wants more money for nuclear power.

Republican John Warner of Virginia is a sponsor of the bill, and Republicans Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina and Olympia Snowe of Maine also spoke in support of it. [end of Bandwagon]

But most Republican senators echoed the remarks of the president on Monday. Bush said the bill would impose “roughly $6 trillion of new costs on the American economy” and called it a tax increase. The president rejects mandatory regulation of emissions.

[Editor's note: why is it "Bush" why not President Bush... he is the president of the USA after all. They referred to Clinton as “President Clinton”]

Bush’s $6 trillion remark referred to the estimated amount of money the bill would generate by 2050 from sales of permits to emit pollution. The overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions would be lowered each year.

[Editor’s Note: Notice how conveniently the writer neglected to mention the money SIX TRILLION DOLLARS in additional costs, while pooh poohing that objection with the lame excuse “overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions would be lowered each year” That is NOT an answer to dispute the SIX TRILLION DOLLARS this un-necessary law would cost. If you want to dispute something, then actually dispute it. She may as well have said, in answer to the SIX TRILLIONS DOLLARS... the train stopped running past my house each day. Because that has as much bearing as “ overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions would be lowered each year” neither address the cost, or attempt to dispute it. This is good journalism?]

The legislation spells out how money from the permits would be used, including $802 billion in a [glittering generality] tax cut for those who need help with higher energy costs and $955 billion for deficit reduction. Billions also would go to help develop cleaner fuels, improve energy efficiency and help wildlife. [glittering generality ends]

The legislation would “raise taxes, raise substantially gas prices, cause worker layoffs and hurt the economy, and leave us less competitive in the world marketplace,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said Wednesday. He called it a “sneaky tax” that would drive up energy costs.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., a sponsor of the legislation, said better fuel economy standards and alternatives to gasoline would drive down demand, end dependence on foreign oil and lower the cost of driving. She and other supporters argued that redirecting part of the proceeds from the sale of the pollution permits to renewable energy would create jobs and replace fossil fuels with cleaner alternatives.

[Editor’s Note: If Senator Boxer was truly concerned about lowering the cost of gas, AND reducing USA dependence on foreign oil... she would support drilling in Anwar — an area that was specifically set aside for drilling under Jimmy Carter’ presidency. She would also support drilling off the coast of Florida, in the mid-west, and Montana, Wyoming and Colorado. If this is really what Senator Boxer said. We don't know if she said the above claimed quote, as it is not quoted in quote marks by the writer.]

“The arguments they’re throwing at us are very shallow. In essence, not one of our opponents has ever even addressed the issue of global warming. They’ve just tried to get us off track on the fictitious attack on gas prices, which falls totally flat,” Boxer said at a news conference.

[Editor’s Note: notice Senator Boxer was quoted in the sentence above... with quote marks even!]

[Band Wagon] Boxer noted that The National Academies, the government’s top advisers on science, engineering and medicine, have reported that the Earth is warming and that most scientists agree [Band Wagon ends] that human actions that have increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere are to blame.

[Editor’s Note: except for the 31,000+ USA scientists whose backgrounds include (detailed analysis of the signers' educations follows):

1. Atmosphere, Earth, & Environment (3,697)

1. Atmospheric Science (114)
2. Climatology (40)
3. Meteorology (341)
4. Astronomy (58)
5. Astrophysics (25)

2. Earth (2,148)

1. Earth Science (107)
2. Geochemistry (62)
3. Geology (1,601)
4. Geophysics (334)
5. Geoscience (23)
6. Hydrology (21)

3. Environment (971)

1. Environmental Engineering (473)
2. Environmental Science (256)
3. Forestry (156)
4. Oceanography (86)

4. Computers & Math (903)

1. Computer Science (217)
2. Math (686)
1. Mathematics (575)
2. Statistics (111)

5. Physics & Aerospace (5,691)

1. Physics (5,106)
1. Physics (2,310)
2. Nuclear Engineering (215)
3. Mechanical Engineering (2,581)
2. Aerospace (585)
1. Aerospace Engineering (585)

7. Chemistry (4,796)

1. Chemistry (3,156)
2. Chemical Engineering (1,640)

8. Biochemistry, Biology, & Agriculture (2,924)

1. Biochemistry (703)
2. Biophysics (65)

9. Biology (1,365)

1. Biology (985)
2. Ecology (72)
3. Entomology (57)
4. Zoology (145)
5. Animal Science (106)

10. Agriculture (791)

1. Agricultural Science (314)
2. Agricultural Engineering (111)
3. Plant Science (292)
4. Food Science (74)

11. Medicine (3,069)

1. Medical Science (726)
2. Medicine (2,343)

12. General Engineering & General Science (9,992)

1. General Engineering (9,751)
1. Engineering (7,289)
2. Electrical Engineering (2,075)
3. Metallurgy (387)
2. General Science (241)

But GEE... I guess those 31,000+ scientists don’t count. It’s like they don’t even exist.

“That's really why our opponents aren’t debating us on this anymore, because they've lost all traction,” Boxer said.

[Editor‘s Note: Maybe they lost all traction because the press refuses to report on a side or report information that does not agree with their individual point of view and do their best to hide facts that point out the fallacy of their beliefs? Could that be it?

[Name Calling] Shortly afterward, the debate stopped altogether Wednesday afternoon. Republicans refused to accept the usual practice of debating a bill without hearing a full reading of it, saying the reason was to pressure Democrats to get more circuit judges approved. [end of Name Calling]

[Editor‘s Note: Oh, those dastardly Republicans.]

The result was that clerks took turns reading the 500-page bill for hours.

[Editor‘s Note: Well, at least we know someone read it. After all why have a piece of “Landmark Legislation” read? “Landmark Legislation” should be a simple one or two page bill... right???

It‘s irresponsible reporters and editors in the press like the one in this example that can help you understand why we are in the shape we are. How stupidity is triumphing over clear thought and critical thinking.

###

Dear Reader, think things through. Think critically. Just because an article is in a newspaper and not on an editorial page, does that mean it‘s not an editorial? Does that mean the article is not biased?

Try and find the writer‘s motives for writing the story, and what belief they are trying to persuade you of, if any.

Then verify for yourself what you read or heard. Don‘t let opinion masquerade as fact.

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

Last night I saw the original “Manchurian Candidate” movie starring Frank Sinatra

You know the one… The plot goes like this

During the Korean War, members of a U. S. Army patrol are captured and taken to Manchuria by Chinese Communists who brainwash them into believing that Raymond Shaw, a mother-dominated sergeant, has led a successful action against the Communists.

Back in the United States, Raymond is awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor on the strength of his comrades’ testimony.

Actually he is now a puppet of the Communists; at the sight of a Queen of Diamonds, his mind is triggered into obeying any instruction, retaining no knowledge of his subsequent actions.

These are the important parts I want to talk about.

That begs a question…

Could One or Both of the Current Presidential Contenders Really Be A Manchurian Candidate

Rather than the Queen of Diamonds, it’s one of these phrases that triggers their mind into obeying any instruction… phrases like “Capitalism”, “Free Enterprise”, “Global Warming”, “Universal Health Care” and “Muslim Terrorists”.

Here is some food for thought…

McCain

He was a Prisoner Of War in Vietnam. Could he have been brainwashed into anti-Capitalism, anti-Free Speech, anti-USA?

It’s possible… Look at some of his pronouncements and laws he sponsored.

Point One —McCain Finegold It purposefully places limits on Freedom of Speech. Now please remember Freedom of Speech is guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States of America Yet McCain who wants to be President of the United States of America sponsors legislation contrary to the Constitution of the United States of America.

Point Two —McCain is anti-Capitalist Want proof? OK. Who said this… “I don’t like obscene profits being made anywhere — and I’d be glad to look not just at the windfall profits tax&lrquo; Obama? Josef Stalin? Karl Marx? Vladimir Lennon? If you answered yes to the above, your answer would be wrong. It was… that professed patriot… John McCain. Gee… I thought the USA was a Capitalist country. Capitalists do their best to make what some people call “Obscene” profits. And Obscene by who’s standards? A person who never had to make a profit? Can you say McCain? Why he even bragged about that.

Point Three —McCain’s Belief in Man made Global Warming Man made global warming is a myth. It is far, far, far from a fact. In fact more than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting “global warming,” the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth’s climate. SO it is really far from a consensus. The politicians love pushing the idea of man made global warming because it gives them an excuse to further attempt to control individuals, strip them of their freedoms, and control businesses, and strip them of their profits. And get “contributions” to line their own pockets by doing “favors” for the contributors. Just ask McCain about Lincoln Financial.

Point Four —He was the pointman on the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, which included amnesty for illegal aliens. Illegal is illegal. If illegal aliens want to be here in the USA, they can do it like all the LAW ABIDING aliens who wait years to get their status (green card, or citizenship). Look at it this way. You want to get in to see a movie, you have been waiting patiently in line for 3 hours. Then suddenly, some people who just arrived, and were not waiting in line cut in at the front of the line. Way in front of you. Can you honestly say you would not mind??? Can you honestly say their time is worth more than yours??? After all YOU were the one who spent all the time waiting in line. So… how would YOU feel? So according to McCain, it’s OK to disobey the laws. Laws are for others, not the ones he feels like giving a break to.

Point Five —McCain being instrumental in fining Big Tobacco Look, if you smoke YOU no one else except YOU are at fault for what happens to your body. There are warnings on cigarette packages. EVERYONE KNOWS Tobacco IS harmful to your health. And if you smoke in spite of this… Sorry, but you are an idiot! No make that IDIOT! And whatever happens is your own fault, not big tobacco. Again anti-Capitalist.

Point Four —Federal Government drug-testing athletes. Obviously McCain wants to get rid of the individualism that made the USA great and replace individual thought and responsibility with a nanny state. A Country where the government owns everything, mandates how much you can make, how much your company can make, where you can go and where you can’t go, what you can say and what you can’t say, and how you can spend your money.

McCain is for Collectivism NOT Individualism. Collectivism is a euphemism for Communism.

Sounds like the Perfect Manchurian Socialist Candidate to me

Could McCain have been brainwashed to promote Collectivism

Let’s look at the other… the projected democrat Presidential candidate… democrat Presidential candidate number 2… because McCain is republican in name only… and his belief in regulating women’s bodies (against abortion). But fiscally and his anti-business, anti-individualism views, and anti-profit views are 100&perc; today’s democrat party views.

Obama

Point One —Obama is anti-Capitalist… or at least a lot of his statements and “handlers and advisors” are.

Point Two —Obama is pro Muslim anti-Jew… or at least a lot of his statements and “handlers and advisors” are.

Point Three —Obama is anti-White… or at least a lot of his statements and “handlers and advisors” are.

Point Four —Obama is anti-Business… or at least a lot of his statements and “handlers and advisors” are.

Point Five —Obama espouses Communistic beliefs and appears to want to change the USA economy to a Communist one… or at least a lot of his statements state his beliefs are.

Could Obama have been captured and brainwashed on his trip when he dressed up in Muslim costume in Nigeria?

He would be the perfect Muslim Manchurian Candidate.

This is Just Philosophizing

I really don’t believe either candidate was brainwashed by “Evil Forces” They just come by their belief’s naturally.

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

I offered them their asking price but they wouldn’t sell it to me.

I wonder why they didn’t sell it to me. I didn’t try to negotiate and I offered them cash too!

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

Here is a brilliant piece of propaganda masquerading as an apology by Wayne Ezell “Reader Advocate” for the Jacksonville Times-Union.

I will dissect this for it’s propaganda content. Which if you read the piece I did on Obama’s speech the propaganda devices will leap out at you.

Remember, there are SEVEN propaganda devices:

To get the most out of this post, I suggest you print off the first page and use it as a guide, so you remember what each color stands for.

I will use the colors of the devices above to show where the propaganda, and which device is being used.

1. Color Red: — Name Calling
2. Color Gold: — Glittering Generality
3. Color Blue: — Transfer
4. Color Maroon: — Testimonial
5. Color Tan: — Plain Folks
6. Color Pink: — Card Stacking
7. Color Green: — Band Wagon

The SEVEN propaganda devices used were defined by the Institute for Propaganda Analysis as:

1. Color Red: Name Calling
   — generally used to giving an idea a bad label which is used to make us reject and condemn the idea without examining the evidence.
2. Color Gold: Glittering Generality — associating something with a “Virtue Word” (a word that has several meanings or can mean something good, or bad to the people who hear it but is not quantifiable e.g. freedom it sounds good, makes us feel good, but it means different things to different people.) A Glittering Generality is generally used to make us accept and approve an idea or thing without examining the evidence. Or reject and not approve an idea, or thing without examining the evidence.
3. Color Blue: Transfer — carries the authority, sanction, and prestige of something or someone respected and revered over to something or someone else in order to make the later acceptable; or it carries authority, sanction, and disapproval to cause us to reject and disapprove something the propagandist would have us reject and disapprove.
4. Color Maroon: Testimonial — this can either be telling a story of how someone or something got to this point, or it can be having a respected or hated person say a given idea, action, or person, or group is good or bad.
5. Color Tan: Plain Folks — is the method to make people feel the speaker or group the speaker represents is just like them “one of us” or the speaker attempts to convince his/her audience that he/she and his/her ideas are good because they are “of the people” the “plain folks”
6. Color Pink: Card Stacking — involves the selection and use of facts and half truths and even lies, illustrations, distractions, and logical or illogical statements in order to give the best or worst possible case for an idea, program, person, or product. Just keep piling on “evidence” in his/her favor.
7. Color Green: Band Wagon
   — “Everybody is doing it.” Or at least all of us are doing it. And with this thought and “proofs” the propagandist tries to convince us that all the members of the group we belong to or want to belong to accept his/her program and therefore we must follow the crowd and “jump on the bandwagon”

Bear in mind, several propaganda devices can be combined to make it even more hard hitting.

Now whether or not Wayne Ezell was purposefully utilizing propaganda, or not is only something he knows himself. So I am not making a judgement on his reasons, I AM however… pointing out his biased propagandised piece masquerading as an apology.

The Headline of the Propaganda Piece is…

How letters botched the facts in sensitive Palestinian issue

(name calling) Misinformation, acrimony and a personal attack that could inspire fear for one’s safety, marked a recent exchange of letters to the editor. It was (name calling) typical of fodder for the internet, but a disappointing lapse in the Times-Union’s editing process.

Editor’s note: please notice here that Wayne Ezell rephrased a complaint from Zogby stated in the paragraph below, and another one later on. Why repeat it here?. Why try to inflame passions? Could there be some motivation on Wayne Ezell’s part he is not admitting to? Has he chosen sides?

(glittering generality, name calling, transfer, and card stacking) The exchange began with a narrowly focused op-ed piece by James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute in Washington D.C., in which he called on the U.S. to demand that Israel stop (name calling) harassing Palestinian-Americans as they try to enter Israel with U.S. passports.

(card stacking) Palestinian-Americans are (name calling) routinely forced to surrender passports and required to obtain a Palestinian travel document, Zogby wrote. Some are denied entry or (name calling) subjected to humiliating interrogations, he said, adding that (transfer) he has the support of the State Department, which has issued a travel advisory about the matter.

Editor’s note: Card Stacking ends

There followed a response letter, which Zogby claims was inaccurate, (name calling) a personal attack on him and perhaps even dangerous in that it could incite those prone to hate crimes to seek him out.

Written by Ron Pollard, the letter criticized Zogby for ignoring the fact that terrorists have used American passports to infiltrate Israel. He accused Zogby of “writing denigrating and inflammatory comments about Israel,” and much more.

Editor’s note: Why has Wayne Ezell decided to quote Ron Polland’s accusations but not quote Zogby’s? It appears to be attempting to make Zogby’s claims a matter of fact and cast doubt on Polland’s? Come on Wayne Ezell let’s be fair here. OK? Unless you really want to appear biased.

Editors Note: Card stacking starts here

“Before founding the Arab American Institute, Zogby created the Palestine Human Rights Commission as the propaganda arm of the Palestine Liberation Organization, a terrorist group responsible for murdering thousands, including 11 Israeli athletes, at the 1972 Munich Olympics.”

(name calling) Get the picture?

Editor’s note: Is it really necessary for Wayne Ezell to start name calling, and attacking Ron Polland?

(name calling) “Shame on him,” Zogby said of Polland, a researcher at the University of North Florida (card stacking) who has written several letters critical of Muslims and Palestinians.

(name calling) “This is the kind of bizarre ranting that occurs on a blog,” Zogby said, asking for an apology.

(glittering generality)“When it is in print, it has more merit and it should be viewed differently,” he said. (glittering generality) “I know you have standards. (name calling) Someone didn’t review it carefully.”

Mike Clark, editorial page editor, said he regretted the failure to more carefully screen the letter.

Editor’s Note: Screen a letter in response to an editorial for what? What failure? This is still implying ALL the content of Ron Polland’s letter was wrong, and his opinion is worth nothing. Card Stacking sequence continues…

In fact, what Polland described as the Palestine Human Rights Commission was actually known a the Palestine Human Rights Campaign.

Editor’s note While the words here are not in themselves name calling (trying to get you to reject anything Ron Polland says), the intent at name calling is obvious… “Look! Look! he made a mistake by calling it a commission instead of a campaign! He obviously doesn’t know what he is talking about so anything he says should be discounted.” Note to Wayne Ezell: Do a better job of hiding your personal bias.
Here is a question… is the word Committee the thing Mike Clark was regretful from his “failure to more carefully screen the letter”?

(transfer, testimonial) Co-founded by Zogby in 1976, its initial meeting was in a Methodist church near the United Nations headquarters. Zogby said he left the organization in 1980 and was succeeded by a Presbyterian minister.

(Card Stacking added to transfer) If the Zogby name is familiar, he is the brother of John Zogby, who heads the polling firm, Zogby International, for which James Zogby serves as an analyst. In addition to his advocacy work at the Arab American Institute, Zogby writes columns and appears frequently before Congress and on news programs.

Editor’s note So an organization is set up near the United Nations. Big deal. Does that mean it is legitimate? Does that mean it deserves more respect? There are a lot of deli’s near the United Nations headquarters that were set up there too. Does the location give them more credibility? Is that what Wayne Ezell is saying? If so, it makes no sense. And after Zogby claims to have left he claims according to Ezell… Zogby was succeeded by a Presbyterian minister. So? What’s the point? A religious leader took over his position? Barack Obama’s former minister is a religious person. Does that make everything he says and does good (Rev Wright)? Because Rev Wright is a recognized religious person, does that make everything he does good? During WWII there was a famous Catholic Priest who wrote a lot of articles, columns, was in the news, had a radio show. His name was Father Coughlin. Perhaps you have herd of him. If not, your parents surely have. He was a very famous Nazi sympathizer, and Nazi propagandist who was living right here in the USA. Up in Michigan I believe. So by the standards implied in the sentances above, his speechs and remarks whould not have been questioned either.

Further… “If the Zogby name us familiar, he is the brother of John Zogby, who heads the polling firm, Zogby International” So? Is Ezell implying by being related to someone who has fame suddenly makes everything you say and do beyond reproach, and you should have more credibility?

Regarding the implied assertion that Zogby somehow has more credibility because “Zogby writes columns and appears frequently before Congress and on news programs” Well… zip a dee do dah! John Gotti (the famed former New York mob boss, Sam Giancana, former Chicago Mob Boss) both repeatedly appeared before congress and denied there is such a thing as the Mafia. Cindy Sheehan writes columns and frequently appears on the news. So do a lot of crazy people. So writing a column, appearing on the news, and appearing before congress do not add credibility to what one says.

We are still in Card Stacking mode by Wayne Ezell

(card stacking) Polland insisted on the(name calling) veracity of the things he wrote. Asked to provide references for his assertions, Polland sent links to seven (name calling) partisan Web sites, including ones for the columnist Michelle Malkin. Those sites can be found by entering Zogby’s name on a search engine.

Editor’s note End of Card Stacking sequence

“The blogosphere is the source of truth where people can really find out what is going on,” Polland said.

Editor’s note: And after reading what Wayne Ezell wrote in attacking Ron Polland’s character and his phrasing I can completely understand why he (Polland) feels that way. Do you not?

(band wagon) In a letter supporting Zogby’s view, Jim Baglia said, “A recent letter writer suggested the Zogby and Americans of Palestinian heritage are (name calling added to bandwagon) sympathetic to terrorists.” Polland countered that he said nothing about “American of Palestinian heritage,” nor did he suggest they are sympathetic to terrorists.

(name calling) Indeed he didn’t, not in those words.

Dear Reader, I hope this helps you see and pick out propaganda that is all over the news… whether the “unbiased advocate” realized he/she is being biased and propagandizing or not. Remember… Think Critically find out the facts for yourself. Just because words come from somone of fame, or related to someone of fame, does not mean they are true, unbiased, or should not be questioned. Now days in particular… Question Everything! Take nothing for granted! Verify sources.

In the words of President Reagan “Trust but Verify”

I hope I was able to help you with this posting.

Some notes and insights.

A visit to the Highly Partisian website of the Palestine Human Rights Campaign (the group Zogby co-founded) http://phrconline.org/ uncovered these quotes on their site

Under the “CAMPAIGNS:” section

Boycott Israeli Goods

“We call for mass consumer action, along the lines of the boycott of South African produce during the anti-apartheid campaign. By joining this boycott individuals and organisations can take concrete steps to stand up against the gross human rights violations by the Israeli State.”

“We therefore support:
A boycott of Israeli products
A boycott of Israeli leisure tourism
An end to Australian firms’ investment in Israel
Suspension of Australian government trade agreements with Israel”

Under their section “Human Rights News Feed”

Report: Ethnic cleansing continues in Jaffa 11 May 2008
Israeli forces kill Gaza mother in front of her children 8 May 2008
Gaza improvises under siege 7 May 2008< br />
Gaza death toll, humanitarian crisis escalates 6 May 2008
West Bank village faces slow death 4 May 2008

These along with some “Unbiased” stories like…

Israel shocked by image of soldiers forcing violinist to play at roadblock

Israeli officer: I was right to shoot 13-year-old child

Israeli soldiers accused of tampering with corpses

But I guess stories like these are not partisan… or if they are I guess coming from an organization co-founded by a person who “is the brother of John Zogby, who heads the polling firm, Zogby International… writes columns and appears frequently before Congress and on news programs” they are unqestionably un-biased.

A side note… Ezell has through the voice of Zogby in Zogby’s accusation about how the internet is unreliable Zogby was quoted as saying “This is the kind of bizarre ranting that occurs on a blog,”, Ezell himself said “typical of fodder for the internet,” Now what I do not understand is why after Ezell goes out of his way to question what is posted on teh internet, he ends his column as the Reader Advocate stating “You are invited to comment on my blog at…”

Makes me wonder if his blog is filled with “the kind of bizarre ranting that occurs on a blog,”, or “typical of fodder for the internet,”?

Thank You for Reading!

###

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

Yes, I’m not always so intense. I need to get away sometimes. It’s always fun seeing surprising things. And funny ones too.

So last weekend we went off to the Jacksonville FL Beach for a sand sculpting contest.

You should try and make it down sometime when you get the chance. It’s an annual event. And the designs and sculptures are very creative… and some quite funny.

My pick of the funniest is the Puffer Fish sculpture below.

Unfortunately, he came in Second place in his category. An outrage!

The First Place winner was the Cheshire Cat

Ok, Ok, I know there are a lot of cat lovers out there. Many more than puffer fish lovers. However, I still think the puffer fish was more creative.

Want Creative?

You Got it…

How about a scene sculpted right out of nature.

If they used some colors to dye the ink, it would have really looked real.

The poles the bird is on are 100% sand. You will aslo see sculpted out of sand — Rocks. Look closely at the smaller pole and you will see a bird nesting on it. A sand bird, that unfortunately my limited picture taking skills and editing skills did not really bring out. In other words, the picture is not nearly as good as the Nice detailed sculpting job!

How many times were you told to get the Sand off your feet?

This sculpture below makes it impossible to do.

Actually there were several teams that made sculptures of feet in sandals. This was the best of the bunch. The others got too much detail, and too much decoration. In other words, they got too carried away. Sometimes less IS more

But that does get old…

And speaking of old (nice segue)… How about some recently unearthed sand fossils!

These were just dug up! Or should I say dug into?

All that picture taking and viewing gets a person really thirsty!

Being in Florida, you have to watch out for gators…

The Final Two of the sculptures I liked best are…

The Mermaid

And if you go for realism in your sand sculptures…

The Pig

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

It all started in a century a long, long, long time ago. With attitudes far, far away from what they are today.

The French have a magnificent history including the claim they invented diplomacy.

If the French Invented Modern Diplomacy How Come They Suck At It?

There was a Chinese Olympic torchbearer named Jin Jing who is confined to a wheelchair. She is a Chinese wheelchair athlete. And as she was proudly (in her National Pride of China), bearing the torch along the Seine River in Paris. Protesting thugs attempted to rip the torch out of her hands. She struggled mightily and kept hold of the torch April 7, 2008. This started the troubles for the French.

Sarkozy the French president rather than apologizing to the Chinese people, and rather than showing up in China with his ministers to save Carefour (the French supermarket chain now being boycotted by millions of Chinese) instead sent a letter to Jin Jing

Did he apologize?

No!

His attempt at putting out the fire in fact poured more gasoline on it

Rather than showing up himself, he instead sent the head of the French Congress Christian Poncelet to China in a special trip on the 21st of April, to personally hand Sarkozy’s letter to and meet with Jin Jing

One would think an apology at least to Jin Jing, and moreover to the people of China for the behavior of the French people and the glee the French press took in the vicious attack on her while all where was doing was carrying the Olympic Torch in the relay… Oh did I mention she was wheelchair bound when the French thugs attacked her?

French Diplomacy?… Make That Arrogance

The letter was reported to have said…

“I acknowledge there was an intolerable attack on Jin Jing. And this hurt Chinese peoples feelings. The incident happened on April 7 in Paris. It made Chinese people very angry. I strongly condemn those peoples behavior. And I want Jin Jing to believe that a few people created this incident, and it does not represent the French people’s friendly feelings towards the Chinese people.”

So when he says “I strongly condemn those peoples behavior.” is he referring to the thugs who attacked Jin Jing… or is he referring to the angry Chinese people who are boycotting French products and the French supermarket Carefour?

It was reported when Christian Poncelet was reading this letter to Jin Jing He said

“I saw Jin Jing was attacked when she was holding the Olympic torch. I was very surprised. And Jin Jing was very brave. I deeply respect Jin Jing and China.”

Jin Jing’s response?

Priceless

Jin Jing said…

“Christian Poncelet seemed sincere.

I’m surprised, in he and president Sarkozy’s letter I did not see any apology or sorry.

This attack in Paris while passing the torch was not only on myself. It is to my country China. I hope that the French government should consider a sincere apology to ALL the Chinese people’s feeling.”

President Sarkozy had previously claimed he was sick and could not make the trip to China, which is why he sent Christian Poncelet in his place.

Paris City Council passed the Paris city mayor Bertrand’s suggestion to give the Dali Lama and a Falun Gong Leader an official Honor similar to the keys to the city. ON THE EXACT SAME DAY Chirstian Poncelet met with Jin Jing.

This is Diplomacy?

More like an insult.

The Sleeping Giant Has Awakened

In the 1970’s and 80’s many people involved in international trade saw great potential in China. At that time, China did not appear to see the potential in herself.

She was called the “Sleeping Giant”

Unfortunately, China’s history especially from the 1800’s onward was one of being physically invaded and dominated by foreign powers. You had the Opium Wars the British started in the 1800’s. Then Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, and the USA all bit off parts of China.

Around 1900 there was a rebellion called the “Boxer Rebellion” that ultimately failed. Leading to stronger restrictions placed on the Chinese by the invading powers.

This all culminated during World War II when the Japanese drove out all other powers and over took China to make them into a Japanese colony.

After World War II the Russians crossed over and dismantled all the modern factories near the Russian border constructed by the Japanese, leaving China with nothing.

China then went into hibernation for decades.

Finally when President Nixon went to China, it was starting to awaken. You know, like when you are just waking up after a long sleep. Still very drowsy.

In the 1970’s and 1980’s everyone saw China had vast deposits of raw materials, chemicals, cotton, gold…

The problem was the Chinese could not do the necessary refining. They learned, and grew richer.

They started exporting like mad, and the country grew richer. They progressed by leaps and bounds.

The people became freer and freer. They could own their own property. They could travel around the country, and to other countries. They could own their own businesses. Large government companies became privatized.

They built their military… not for conquest… but to prevent them from being over-run by foreign powers again.

Nationalism Was Missing

The only thing missing was Nationalism. National pride. Like the French have in France, the Germans in Germany, The British have in Great Britan, the people of the USA have in the USA.

The Chinese people needed a catalyst.

The French and the world wide press primarily provided it with the disgusting manner in which the French thugs started the attacks on the Olympic Torch and the world wide press gleefully praising these vicious attacks.

The Chinese have done what any self respecting people would do. They are lining up behind their country and National Pride that is being attacked by other countries who apparently are jealous of the progress and riches the Chinese have made for themselves.

People around the world, and governments around the world should remember… this is NOT the Imperial China of the late 1800’s.

It is not dis-united. With groups fighting to overthrow the Emperor, weakening the country. Today, modern China is a vibrant, self sufficient, modern country. And it has a modern strong military, and it has citizens who really care a lot about their country, and have a lot of national pride. In fact much more than the politically correct Western countries have displayed toward themselves.

Something to think about.

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

Do you like getting the best prices you can when you shop on the net?

Do you like to pay extra so an out of state merchant can hire extra people and waste more time figuring out tax codes for states they do not have a presence in?

And what do these big spenders — big spenders with YOUR MONEY — spend it on?

Feel good “Projects” inane laws, more intrusion into your privacy, and whatever hand-outs they can come up with THEY (the politicians) think will get most of the people to vote for them to keep themselves in office… so they can waste public money on all sorts of things… like say in the case of Elliot Spitzer former Governor of NY… Hookers. High priced hookers.

Let me ask you a question…

Is paying for hookers… high priced call girls… for politicians where you want your tax dollars to go?

Now don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against job perks for jobs well done… but this is a bit overboard… don’t you agree?

Especially in this time of supposed fiscal belt tightening, where the politicians are crying

“there isn’t enough money in State funds to pay for education” (Spitzer got his… I’ll be he was educated on some new positions ),

or they cry whaa whaa whaaa “there’s not enough money to keep proven criminals in prison”, or care for the sick, or keep the libraries open every day, or…

You get the picture.

But they have enough money to go on expensive “fact finding missions” aka Junkets at tax payer expense. They can find enough money to pay $10,000 a month cell phone bills. They can find enough money to pay for private cars and chauffeurs to take them wherever they want to go… and this goes for local city level politicians too.

Why Your Internet Purchases May Cost You More, Due To Politicians Greed And Lust For YOUR Money

Do you like to pay extra so an out of state merchant can hire extra people and waste more time figuring out tax codes for states they do not have a presence in?

How would you like to see prices on everything you buy on the internet go up by at least 10% + the sales tax you should be paying… all because some greedy politicians want to get their grubby huge hands deeper into your pocket?

Well, if you like that idea, you will love New York.

As just reported…

New York Rules Out-of-State Web Merchants Must Collect State Taxes

Apr 16, 2008 1:44 PM , By Jim Tierney

The complete story can be read at…

target=”_new”>Illegal Taxation: New York Rules Out-of-State Web Merchants Must Collect State Taxes

The funny… actually stupid thing is… this law was already declared illegal… make that ILLEGAL… back in 1992 in the 1992 Supreme Court Decision, Quill Corp. vs. North Dakota cry and cry as the politicians will, and their cronies complaining that the ONLY reason they are not selling as much is because of “unfair” competition from out of state stores because the out of state stores don’t have to collect sales tax.

Did these stores ever think of the ADVANTAGES THE LOCAL STORES HAVE OVER OUT OF STATE RETAILERS?

Of course not. Everyone ONLY buys based on price.

We are all like lemmings. (this is sarcasm)

Specialization in an interest has nothing to do with it.

Customer service has nothing to do with it.

A pleasantry when we come in like maybe a simple “Thank You” has nothing to do with it./p>

Receiving notifications from out of state retailers on items they are carrying we may have an interest in has nothing to do with falling sales at local retailers.

Oh no… why it has to be that 3, or 4, or 8&151; sales tax.

Of course when we buy from an out of state retailer, we typically end up paying shipping which is about the same as the sales tax would be.

Maybe these Cry babies should look for a less costly location, and then reduce their prices… IF they think it is strictly a price issue.

Better yet… why not stat selling on the internet themselves and get even.

They Make Me Sick… The Whole Lot Of Them

And any store or company who believes I should have to pay higher prices so they can make more profit for themselves, I will boycott. I will refuse to buy a single thing from them. Even if they were the last water store and I was in the desert.

They are beneath contempt. Blaming others for their deficiencies in their business.

Hey Fast food places are hiring, maybe these cry baby store owners should go get a job there. They won’t have to face “unfair competition”

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post

                  

Copy this HTML to your website to create a link to this post:

Powered by Bookmarkify™

]]>

I was reading TV Guide the other day… April 21-27, 2008 edition. When I saw a headline that stunned me. But the article was even funnier.

The Headline was…

Will Katie Leave CBS?

Well, sure… some day… Duh!

The story in TV Guide Starts out with…

When Katie Couric arrived to take over the CBS Evening News, the plan was to have one of America’s favorite TV personalities reinvent the stolid evening newscast and attract younger viewers. After a strong debut in September 2006, the show quickly dropped to a distant third…

… The ratings immediately indicated viewers who tune in for a 22-minute distillation of the day’s events didn’t want something new.

Now Hold On A Minute There Bucky!!!!!

Katie Couric spouting the same old heavily biased, slanted, one sided propaganda she was known for on the morning show she hosted… the same drivel Dan Rather was spouting is… Something New?

You don’t get it do you Stephen Battaglio, author of this piece.

Maybe people were sick and tired of only getting one side of the news… not both. Is that possible?

Maybe people were sick and tired of the relentless propaganda coming from her and Dan Rather’s mouth. Is that possible?

As I remember it, first the blame was on the audience, something like they could not understand her.

Then it was the audience was prejudice against a woman anchoring the news… couldn’t handle it

Now it’s… oh Dan Rathers ratings were dropping faster than the US Dollar is today, and the audience didn’t want something new.

Yeah Right!

Their logic is astounding… and really funny.

With this mentality I have a new name, and a totally new concept for the CBS Evening News.

Since no one is taking it seriously, why not have a comedian do the news? Do it with physical pratfall humor, or do it with the humor of the glory days of Saturday Night Live, or SCTV that gave comedic greats like John Candy, Eugene Levy, Andrea Martin, and others their start to fame in the USA.

Now That would be wort watching!

The New Name?

Comedy Broadcast Service Evening News

After all the CBS Evening News is a joke now, so why not make it really funny, and let us all in on it.

Maybe Steven Wright is available. His straight faced esoteric humor might just be the ticket. Or perhaps Jon Lovitz. Now that… that would be really funny.

What are your suggestions? Who would you liek to see hosting it?

If you like this post then please subscribe to the full RSS feed. You can also subscribe by Email.

Bookmark and Share This Post