Tag Archives: NPR

G.W.B. Was Never THIS “Incurious”

by Annie | Leave a comment

“Even if you have only limply functioning neurons and no press-credentials, a human-organism of blob-shape can ascertain, without even jiggling your blob, that two presidents don’t accidentally “run into” each other anywhere.  Ever.”

Remember how 99% of the political class at ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, The New York Times, The Washington Post, etc. sniffed at how “incurious” President Bush was?  When, in fact, it turns out his G.P.A was a point higher (not much but it matters!) than John Kerry’s?  And it has later emerged that President Bush is an avid, voracious reader (It’s been reported a book a week, typically, favoring non-fiction, and these are books well over 300 pages & without pictures, for any snot-nosed progressive who might be reading this.)

Well, we’ve reached peak “incurious.”  

And, once again, sadly, it is as it relates to those who cover presidents, and not, predictably, as it relates to the intellectual capacity of a president himself  – with or without a “D” after his name.

The most white-hot story in politics right now is Hillary Clinton’s rogue email server. There’s nothing more important or interesting in political circles right now – off-the-air, that is.  

Oh, there’s been some coverage of this profoundly criminal and dangerous breach of national security on the alphabet networks, and even MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” has had some honest coverage of it (but that’s only because they want another Democrat to win, not Hillary, who is insufficiently radical, to them, which is kind of horrifying all by itself.)

And, to be sure, The New York Times has done extensive reporting on the issue, even “breaking” the story back in March (but that’s only because they were fed all the details by that no-necked-short-furry-Machiavellian-troll Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s handler-consigliare, who also hates Hillary, also because she is insufficiently radical – and other reasons.)  

The New York Times has subsequently done some other reporting, from other reporters there, trying to white-wash the whole mess, and it’s a safe bet the white-wash reporters got expletive-laced, screaming, threatening phone-calls, just like the original March story reporter got, who dutifully changed the text without attribution (You’re supposed to tell your readers when you change the meaning of the text of an original story.  The New York Times didn’t. That’s bad.  It’s “Journalistic Ethics 101.”).  The Washington Post appears to have had the same trajectory.  So while hat-tips are owed to MSNBC, The New York Times, and The Washington Post, for covering at all, their motives are suspect; cleary, deeply, cynically, suspect.

So here we are.  It’s the dog-days of summer, Obama’s on the Vineyard, and a Clinton is in legal trouble.  All is normal.

Except it’s not.

It’s really, really not.

The two men who have treated Hillary to her two biggest public humiliations, Bill, who serially cheated on her, and Barack, who beat her from her “inevitable” crown in 2008, “ran into each other” on the golf course.  “Accidentally” says the press.

WHAT?

Even if you have only limply functioning neurons and no press-credentials, a human-organism of blob-shape can ascertain, without even jiggling your blob, that two presidents don’t meet “accidentally” anywhere. Ever. Their Secret Service details know.  Are we to believe nobody on the Obama detail called their buddy on the Clinton detail or vice-versa?  Seriously?  That’s silly, childish even.  That’s unicorn territory. No.  This was a purposeful meeting.  And the fact that there are pictures is also no accident.  Obama has proven capable of keeping the overwhelming majority of his time on all his golf outings private – if he wants to. There’s no way a picture of the two presidents would happens unless Obama wanted it to.  No way.  

So!  What are we to believe about this?  Here are some ideas, as curated by Twitchy, that seem right to me, and gave birth to this blog post of mine. How is it POSSIBLE we have such an incurious press?  I can think of a dozen questions, (without jiggling my blob!) I would love to ask, if only to see the looks on their faces, which might be all the answer we need.  Good grief!    

 

   


BOOM! (That’s what I think.)

Share the post "G.W.B. Was Never THIS “Incurious”"

This. Is. Stunning.

by Annie | Leave a comment

UPDATE #2 SAT 06/06/2015 8:15am:  As expected none of the eunuch-palace-scribes at either the White House or State Department briefings asked about Gertz’s findings.  I even checked to see if D.O.D./Pentagon was having a briefing or had had one recently and they just linked to State.  Gosh, I miss journalism.

UPDATE #1 FRI 06/05/2015 8:30am:  I wonder if  The New York Times was “asked” to write the inane Editorial I commented & blogged on just the other day because The White House knew this piece from Gertz was coming? Things that make you go ‘hmm’. 

This is quite possibly the worst thing ever written about any American president ever by quite possibly the best reporter on intelligence matters in America, Bill Gertz (And that’s not just my opinion.  Mr. Gertz is widely regarded as the “go-to” guy for his razor-sharp mind and deep & impeccable sources.  The only other reporter I would put anywhere near him is Catherine Herridge of Fox News.)

I know I sound hyperbolic, but dear God… Gertz is basically reporting that our President has given aid & comfort to the enemy.  And not just any enemy.  This enemy ties each of a woman’s arms and legs to four cars then speeds off (yeah…), rapes an 8 year old girl in front of her family then makes each watch while the others get beheaded one by one, crucifies 3 year old boys, drops gays off rooftops, plays soccer with decapitated heads… burns a caged man alive… I mean… even members of the administration have said publicly they’ve never seen such depravity.

This charge about Obama has been made made many, many, many times before, but never from a source as universally respected as Gertz.  The only thing wrong with it is the White House Press Corps, most prominently ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, The New York Times, The Washington Post, will never, ever, ever touch it because Gertz now writes for a “right-wing” source (He published this in The Washington Times, but he also writes for The Washington Free Beacon, a newer paper without the sort of strange background as the WT).  It might possibly come up at a State Department briefing.  Possibly even a Pentagon briefing.  If it does, I’ll update.)

Damn.

I’m still sort of thunderstruck so I’ll just stop here and invite you to read the American Thinker’s take on it, below.

Via The American Thinker – Gertz Expose: Pentagon docs show Obama supports Muslim Brotherhood
June 5, 2015
By James Lewis

Bill Gertz, top Pentagon reporter for the Washington Times has just reported that “Obama secretly backed Muslim Brotherhood.”  The Brotherhood is literally a fascist Muslim radical group from the Nazi period.

Writes Gertz:
President Obama and his administration continue to support the global Islamist militant group known the Muslim Brotherhood. A White House strategy document regards the group as a moderate alternative to more violent Islamist groups like al Qaeda and the Islamic State.” (Aka ISIS).

The policy of backing the Muslim Brotherhood is outlined in a secret directive called Presidential Study Directive-11[.] … The directive was produced in 2011[.] …

Efforts to force the administration to release the directive or portions of it under the Freedom of Information Act have been unsuccessful. …

The directive outlines why the administration has chosen the Muslim Brotherhood, which last year was labeled a terrorist organization by the governments of Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the United Arab Emirates as a key vehicle of U.S. backing for so-called political reform in the Middle East. …

The UAE government also has labeled two U.S. affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood, the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim American Society, as terrorist support groups. Both groups denied the UAE claims. Egypt is considering imposing a death sentence on Mohamed Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood-backed former president who was ousted in military coup in July 2013.

Critics of the administration’s strategy say the Brotherhood masks its goals and objectives despite advocating an extremist ideology similar to those espoused by al Qaeda and the Islamic State, but with less violence. The group’s motto includes the phrase “jihad is our way.” Jihad means holy war and is the Islamist battle cry.

Counterterrorism analyst Patrick Poole said the Brotherhood in recent weeks has stepped up its use of violent attacks in Egypt.

The Muslim Brotherhood is called the “Ikhwan” in Arabic, meaning “brotherhood.”  (Like German “ich” and “won.”)  It took that name in 1928, when fascist and Nazi “brotherhoods” were spreading all over Europe.

From the start, the Ikhwan actively collaborated with Hitler through the mufti of Jerusalem.  One of their slogans is “All we want is to die in the way of Allah” – which means killing as many infidels as you can when you die.  This is the theological basis for suicide-bombing.  Today, there is no daylight between the Ikhwan and ISIS.

In 1981, an Ikhwan front group assassinated Pres. Anwar Sadat, the most important Arab peacemaker with Israel.

The Ikhwan employs Malik Obama, the president’s half-brother, as a big money man.

The Ikhwan created Hamas – the terrorist group that uses children as human shields to protect rocket launchers in Gaza.

The Ikhwan helped neo-Ottoman fascist Erdoğan to take over Turkey.

The Ikhwan is almost certainly behind ISIS, together with Turkey and Qatar.

In 2011, the Ikhwan overthrew Egypt’s President Hosni Mubarak – who upheld the Egypt-Israel peace treaty for four decades – in close collusion with Obama, Code Pink, and Bill Ayers.  The Western media actually reported that  Code Pink and Bill Ayers were protesting Hosni Mubarak in the weeks before Mubarak was overthrown.  Today, millions of Egyptians believe that Obama supports their mortal enemy, the Ikhwan.

The Ikhwan is now engaged in a monumental civil war against President El Sisi, whose court just condemned its leader to death.  Their leaders who are not in jail have fled to Qatar, Turkey, and Gaza, all part of the Ikhwan network.

The Ikhwan controls American front groups like CAIR, which buys up American politicians by the truckload, especially on the left.

Four-star admiral James Lyons (USN, Ret.) has gone public with the charge that the Ikhwan has deeply penetrated U.S. intelligence.  That is why Obama can’t even say the words “Muslim war on America.”  That is why our defense has been so feeble and cringing.

Hillary Clinton’s closest personal aide as SecState was Huma Abedin – an Ikhwan insider.  Abedin was one of the few people who had access to Hillary’s illegal personal e-mail account on the night of Benghazi.  Nothing has changed – Abedin is still at the top of the Hillary campaign.  Probably for the first time in U.S. history, presidential candidate Hillary has stonewalled any media questions, period.

Major Ikhwan money flows have been reported going to the Clintons, the Carters, and Obama.  Ikhwan penetration of American society and the U.S. government gives all the appearance of a political quid pro quo – with our survival at stake.

Bill Gertz’s Pentagon documents now prove the Ikhwan connection directly.  The liberal media will try to stifle the facts, as always.

Maybe this time they will fail.

==end==

Share the post "This. Is. Stunning."

My Tax Dollars went to NPR and all I got was MOCKED and now a PULITZER

by Annie | Leave a comment

The man who produced NPR’s “Learn to Speak Tea Bag” won a Pulitzer today. What’s wrong with that? Am I just humorless? Thin-skinned? Jealous? Not even close. Not the issue. Not by a long shot.

Late last fall NPR, National Public Radio, funded by your tax dollars launched a wholly incorrect cheap shot at Tea Party “Learn to Speak TeaBag” (“Tea bag” being a crude sexual reference). It went viral on the internet, was looped on MSNBC and reported on by Fox.  Let me be clear: I have no troubles with anybody saying anything about anybody – unless it’s taxpayer dollars being used to propogandize the very Americans who fund their payroll– Then I got a problem because it is a fundamental abuse of the public trust and federal power.


It’s the flip side of the same coin which resulted in Obama’s book club buddy Chavez imprisoning the head of a TV station, the last standing media outlet to dare to criticize him, which if we were to produce our own little cartoon video would translate to mere fact telling. That was three weeks ago and I’ve not heard word one from Obama condemning that action. Not a peep from him or anyone in his administration taking up the torch of liberty like every other president before him who has witnessed such abuse. Neither, parenthetically, did “the NPR buck stops here” President Obama admonish the agency he technically oversees for the cheap shot at tax payer expense. We can only presume that because the propaganda was a net gain to him, he had no problem with using federal government dollars to produce it.


Obama’s negligence, yet again, to urge a higher standard of dissent, with or without abusive use of tax dollars, is not new. His community organizing arm, OFA, enlisted the help of the tax payer funded National Endowment of the Arts to propagandize on behalf of his agenda… More on that later.


Like the Nobel, the Pulitzer has fallen into irretrievable disrepute. It’s so far gone beyond merit and into pure inbred, intellectual masturbation, it’s barely worth getting upset anymore…

Share the post "My Tax Dollars went to NPR and all I got was MOCKED and now a PULITZER"