The Breitbart video very effectively makes the case that Waters is guilty of hypocrisy. Her behavior at the rally is at least as unattractive as her description of the tea partiers’s; conduct. On the other hand, so what? When has a politician ever complained about the other side's incivility without being guilty of hypocrisy?
But a look further back into Waters’s history reveals her hypocrisy to be far worse than is typical. The last time America experienced political mob violence–the Los Angeles riots of 1992–Waters was there offering excuses and justifications.
The L.A. riots began on April 29, 1992, after a jury returned a not-guilty verdict in the trial of four Los Angeles policemen charged in connection with the videotaped beating of Rodney King. By the time the riots wound down, six days later, 53 people had been killed and thousands injured.
Maxine Waters was a freshman representative from California’s 29th Congressional District (now the 35th), which covers areas of southern Los Angeles where the rioting was centered. Her own district office was burned to the ground. She quickly emerged as an advocate on behalf of the rioters.
“I accept the responsibility of asking people not to endanger their lives,” the Associated Press quoted her as saying on April 30. “I’m not asking people not to be angry. . . . I have a right to be angry.”
Looks like Maxine Water‘s past is coming back to haunt her. I guess that will teach her to open her mouth, when in all honesty, she should keep it shut.
But then again, does not that describe liberals in general? I mean, are they not all like that? Want others to conform to a high standard; all the while not living up to it themselves?
They’ve been doing it for years. This proves that.
Jeeez… I would have gotten the guy some hosting for a blog, if all he wanted to do is vent. 🙄
A 63-year-old Yakima County man has been charged with threatening to kill U.S. Sen. Patty Murray over her support of the health-care overhaul.
The FBI and local police arrested Charles Alan Wilson at his Selah home early Tuesday. He later made an initial appearance in federal court in Yakima on one count of threatening a federal official. He was appointed a public defender and ordered to be kept in custody pending a detention hearing Friday.
According to the charges, staffers in Murray’s office in the Jackson Federal Building in downtown Seattle had become concerned over phone calls by an unknown man in recent months. The calls came from a blocked number and often were made at night or on weekends.
Usually, according to a staffer, the calls were merely vulgar and harassing.
But on March 22, “the caller began to make overt threats to kill and/or injure Senator Murray,” according to the complaint signed by FBI Agent Carolyn Woodbury.
In that call, a man the FBI says it has identified as Wilson stated, “I hope you realize there’s a target on your back now … Kill the [expletive] senator! I’ll donate the lead.”
Again, the old man was most likely upset. But, he did break the law. As I have written on here before, it is one thing to get on a blog like mine, write about politics; it is another to start phoning in death threats. That is, I am afraid, just plain stupid. Hopefully this old man learns his lesson. He might have also been a little disturbed as well. Maybe he needed a little help. Either way, he will get that help or learn his lesson, one way or another.
Again, what the guy did was stupid, 50 years ago, you would have gotten away with something like that. But in this day and age of Caller ID and high tech phones. There’s no getting away with this sort of thing anymore. Besides all that; this woman is just one person. It is not like she was solely responsibility for the passage of the bill.
Again, while I feel for the old guy; what he did was wrong.
War correspondents take huge risks to bring news of a war to readers far away. What this shows is just how risky it is to embed with terrorists, especially when their enemy controls the air. War is not the same thing as law enforcement; the US forces had no responsibility for identifying each member of the group and determining their mens rea. Legitimate rescue operations would have included markings on the vehicle and on uniforms to let hostile forces know to hold fire, and in the absence of that, the hostile forces have every reason to consider the second support group as a legitimate target as well. It’s heartbreaking for the families of these journalists, but this isn’t “collateral murder” — it’s war.
Worst case scenario this is a few innocent being accidentally killed in the fog of war.
But the video doesn’t even appear to be worst case scenario. It appears, in fact, that the video shows armed insurgents engaging or about to engage US troops. The Reuters camera men had embedded themselves with the insurgents. This makes them enemy combatants themselves and should have been shot.
Reuters has a long history of its local stringers embedding themsleves with terrorist forces. Perhaps they do this because they are sympathetic, perhaps they do this to get “the story”, but it matters little to those engaging insurgents.
When you embed yourselves with terrorists you know the risk. You are producing propaganda for them. You have become one of them.
Anything less than this understanding is purposeful naivite about “objective journalism”. In war there can be no objective journalism. You’re either with us or the enemy. If you want to stay neutral stay out of the war zone.
As for those who went in to pick up the bodies? Perhaps they were innocents. I’ve no idea.
But you drive your van into an active military engagement? What the hell were you thinking?
You are stupid. Innocent, but stupid. You’re asking to be killed.
And if you brought children into the midsts of an ongoing military engagement that makes you more than stupid: it makes youcriminally negligent.
“It’s their fault for bringing their kids to a battle,” says one of the Americans on the video. Indeed it is.
People, this is war. This happens in war. It can’t be avoided. If you want to end civilian casualties then end war. Start by asking armed Islamists to put down their weapons. But you won’t do that because your real objection isn’t war, it’s America. Which is why anti-war activists around the globe never protest al-Qaeda, only America.
They’re not anti-war, they’re anti-American.
I agree. If you embed yourself with terrorists, you die. Just that simple.
I humbly submit, that these so-called Journalists got just was coming to them.
Update #3: Apparently some liberals, including a gay pedophile stalker blogger, that I will never link to; cannot grasp the idea of sarcasm and are complaining about what I wrote here about Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow. Well, you know what liberals? I got two words; FUCK YOU. You bastards sat out here in the Blogosphere and mocked and derided Conservatives and the Tea Party protesters, to the point of using a crude sexual phrase to describe them. —– and you are going to bitch about me being a snarky bomb thrower? Please. 🙄 Just like that stupid liberal jack assed twit Maxine Waters, do as I say, not as I do. 🙄
Update: Rusty Talks back to me… (wow! 😯 )
Over at Political Byline:
“I humbly submit, that these so-called Journalists got just was coming to them”
Perhaps. This wouldn’t be the first time Reuters had sent off it’s “crack team” of locals to give the terrorists’ “point of view”.
Now why am I not surprised? 🙄
Update #2: Leave it one of my commentators to point out the obvious, From Gaven in the comments:
First off, watch the full, unedited one, without the political editorializing:
A little background is given in this one that is absent from the edited one. First off, the Apache’s mission was to support that infantry platoon. A few minutes before the video starts, that platoon takes RPG and small arms fire in that vicinity, so the Apache is called up to find the guys doing it. Source: Click here to read – See the 12th paragraph.
Our video starts. They see a large group of people, all adult males, several of whom are armed. You can see 2 AK’s and at least one actual RPG around 3:30-3:45 (Pic) . Next, they see a man peeking around the corner and pointing what looks like an RPG at the infantryman about four blocks away. Armed men? Check. Immediate threat to American lives? Check. They get permission to fire, and as soon as they have a shot, they take it.
(For what it’s worth, the actions of this group of people are very suspicious looking, especially in a combat zone mere minutes after US forces have been fired on. Including having the RPG firer simply poke around the corner and fire while everyone else hangs back to avoid backblast. See here for a slightly humorous example: Click for pic . Obviously one example does not a trend make, but I’m just bringing it to your attention)
Secondly, I have yet to see anyone say that the group of guys with the reporters were NOT insurgents. For extra emphasis, at 30:45 there is more small arms fire. At 31:10 you see guys with AK’s and body armor running away from the area. There was DEFINITELY a battle going on in this area, something that Wikileaks biased editing job carefully omits.
It wouldn’t be the first time that Reuters stringers were hanging out with insurgents for some good pictures. For instance, this picture:
Here, Namir is obviously standing about 10 feet away from insurgents as they commit an act of violence. I’m not passing judgement on him, I actually think it’s good to have reporters as close as possible to the conflict, but I’m merely pointing out that hanging out with insurgents is something that Noor-Eldeen had been doing for a few years prior to his death.
Anyways, back to the video.
At 19:20, someone reports finding an RPG round.
At 32:54, someone asks if it’s been defused yet, and is told “no, it’s still live”
Even if everyone in Iraq has an AK, only the bad guys have RPG rounds. The discovery of an RPG round among the bodies makes me believe that Namir Noor-Eldeen was yet again hanging out with an insurgent group looking for great shots. He and the other photographer were almost certainly innocent of actual wrongdoing, but the armed men they were with were in all likelihood some of the ACTUAL insurgents who fired on US troops before the video started.
As for the van that was attacked, I’ll admit that it’s slightly sketchier, but I’ll clarify that by noting that insurgents often clean up their own wounded, so an black van showing up with three or four adult men who immediately jump out and start aiding wounded insurgents is absolutely suspicious enough to make a case for engaging it. I don’t know that I personally would have engaged that van, but I find in totally understandable that they did. Although, again, there’s no proof that the men in the van weren’t also insurgents, since the video leaves out a lot of context.
Yes, this video is disturbing simply for the sheer violence and immediate destruction. But think about it before mindlessly jumping to conclusions regarding what actually happened that day.
Also, allow me to point something out of the liberals and weak kneed Conservatives who are reading this. Let’s go back in history a bit, shall we? During World War 2, The Korean War and during Vietnam, I do not remember ever hearing of any American or international journalists embedding with the enemy then. So, why were these loons embedded with the Terrorists? Because point blank, these so-called “journalists” and their employer, who is quite obviously liberal; have an editorial position that the United States of America deserved the attacks on 9/11 and that these fighters in Iraq were a legitimate fighting force; that’s why! That is, as far as this writer is concerned, an Anti-American stance. Because of this, these bastards got EXACTLY AND I DO MEAN EXACTLY WHAT WAS COMING TO THEM! Period, end of story.
Three explosions, two rocket attacks and subsequent gunfire have been reported in the near vicinity of the U.S. Consulate in Peshawar, Pakistan, on April 5. The attack occurred early afternoon local time when the consulate would have been full of both American and local employees. The death toll is reported at 36 but is expected to rise.
There are no assessments yet of the damage that the consulate building has sustained, but reports indicate that the explosions led to the collapse of other, adjacent buildings. Pakistani soldiers are also reported to be engaging militants in gunfire, indicating that militants are actively engaged in an attack near the area — possibly with the intention of breaching the U.S. Consulate.
[….]
UPDATE:
One attacker was able to blow up in the U.S. Consulate premises, AAJ TV reported April 5. The front side of the U.S. Consulate has been totally destroyed. Reports indicate that seven or eight security personnel in the consulate are dead. The consulate’s communication system is down.
Many people are wondering why this has happened. I think I know why. It could very well be because of this here:
KABUL — President Obama’s visit to Kabul last week, intended in part to forge a closer working relationship with President Hamid Karzai, has helped produce the opposite: an angry Afghan leader now attacking the West for what he perceives as an effort to manipulate him and weaken his rule.
Karzai’s relationship with his U.S. backers in the past week has taken a sharp turn for the worse after his two anti-Western speeches in three days, remarks that some officials see as a rehearsed, intentional move away from the United States.
In remarks to parliament members Saturday, Karzai said that if foreign interference in his government continues, the Taliban would become a legitimate resistance — one that he might even join, according to lawmakers present.
“When I heard Karzai’s remarks, it really shocked me. It scared me,” a senior Afghan official who works closely with Karzai said. “We should not take this lightly. This is a golden opportunity to have the West here; we can’t squander it.”
Karzai’s comments have angered U.S. officials and some of his prominent Afghan colleagues in the government, who fear he is jeopardizing international funding and military support because his pride has been injured.
“That guy’s erratic, he’s unpredictable. I don’t get him,” said a senior U.S. military official in Kabul.
However, if you read a little deeper, you will see this:
But the next day, Karzai told a gathering of lawmakers that foreign interference fuels the insurgency. One lawmaker said Karzai made the point that if he is compelled to obey foreigners, “I’ll join the Taliban.”
“I know he’s cooperating with the U.S., but he just wants to give us a wrong perception. He’s trying to prove himself as a hero, a nationalist,” the lawmaker said.
Some of the presidents’ supporters said that people overreacted to the statements, and that Karzai is well aware of how reliant he is on the United States and other countries fighting in Afghanistan. The United States pours billions of dollars monthly into Afghanistan, and 30,000 new troops are arriving to fight the Taliban.
Speaking at a meeting of about 1,200 tribal leaders and local officials in the southern city of Kandahar on Sunday, Karzai again suggested that U.S. pressure is counterproductive.
“Afghanistan will be fixed when its people trust that their president is independent and not a puppet,” he said. “We have to demonstrate our sovereignty. We have to demonstrate that we are standing up for our values.”
I think this guy needs to make up his mind. Trying to play to his people and be friends with the west is not going to work. The United States of America is NOT interested in owning that Country, no more than it is interested in owning Iraq. We are, or at least we were, there to get rid of Al-Qaeda terrorists who wanted to attack and destroy America. It seems that our focus is shifting and we are now trying to play “Paddy Cake” with Afgan Leaders who want to be friendly with the the U.S. and the Taliban. The President of the United States needs to firm with Karzai, and tell him either choose the Taliban and possibly being killed by the United States in military action or choose true freedom and democracy. You cannot have it both ways, terrorism and democracy cannot co-exist.
Just a personal aside, I had a sinking feeling that this sort of a thing would happen, if we elected a Democrat for a President. For all of his failings, for all of the stuff that I did not like about him; George W. Bush knew exactly how to deal with these sorts of things. He was seen by the Afghan people and the Iraqis as a firm strong leader, who was willing to risk it all to stand against terrorism, Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. President Obama just does not have that same stance. President Obama and by default, the Democrats see terrorism as a juvenile criminal behavior; and it is not; it is a war against freedom and democracy in the name of a backward and dangerous religion.
I guess the only hope at this point is that Obama realizes what he is dealing with here and changes his focus. However, I just do not see that happening at all. Needless to say, the next year few years is going to be interesting, when it comes to the war on terror and this entire situation.
Just my observation; Anyone that cannot differentiate between a violent anti-Government or Anti-American terrorist and someone peacefully protesting the misdeeds of the current Government in power, shouldn’t be driving a damn car —- Much less writing an opinion column. Besides all of this, just where the hell where these socialist liberal idiots, when the idiotic people were calling for the death of President George W. Bush? Oh, that’s right! They were providing covering for them and also, supporting them as well. 🙄
Damned hypocrites, every last one of them. 😡 Which is why I will never support the Democratic Party, ever again. I’d rather never work another damned job in my life and be as poor as a Church mouse, and never vote again for that Party again; than to sell my soul to a party of Socialists who reek with the smell of utter hypocrisy.
Gadgets come and gadgets go. The iPad you buy today will be e-waste in a year or two (less, if you decide not to pay to have the battery changed for you). The real issue isn’t the capabilities of the piece of plastic you unwrap today, but the technical and social infrastructure that accompanies it.
If you want to live in the creative universe where anyone with a cool idea can make it and give it to you to run on your hardware, the iPad isn’t for you.
If you want to live in the fair world where you get to keep (or give away) the stuff you buy, the iPad isn’t for you.
If you want to write code for a platform where the only thing that determines whether you’re going to succeed with it is whether your audience loves it, the iPad isn’t for you.
I have to give props to Mr. Cory Doctorow for his brutal honesty. The article is quite the good read; from a standpoint of someone, who does not even own a iPod, much less an iPhone! 😀 I mean, I am just not big into, what I like to call, useless gadgets. To me, a phone is for making phone calls. Not for sitting there and playing games and all the crap you can do on them today. I mean, there is a thing called “Sexting” which is transmitting rather nasty pictures of one’s self over the internet. We never had to contend with stuff like that when I was a kid. (I am 37, by the way…) Besides that, you would not want to be transmitting naked pictures of my body anyhow; as I am almost sure it would cause someone great problems of the psychological sort to see me naked.
Now, from a greedy capitalist’s stand point; if I had a bunch of shares with Apple right about now and I saw this article. I would be asking for this guys head on a platter. I mean, just who the hell does this grumpy old jackass think he is? I am sure that Steve Jobs is not too happy about someone dissing his product, that he’s worked his rear end off to produce. On the other hand, this is just one man’s opinion of this product and I am sure that there are many others who have written that this is an exciting product to try.
The bottom line is this; we live in a free market, capitalistic society, and that free market will decide if this product is a smashing success or if it will be a flop. That is because that Free Market allows the PEOPLE, not the Government, to choose whether a product will be sold or even successful or not. Granted, it will take effort to make this happen; promotion by the company, the sales people and even the customer to buy the product. However the point is….. the freedom of choice is there. You can choose which product you wish to own by apple, all of them or none of them at all. That is the beauty of America. The only thing stopping you is your financial situation and also possibly your personal desire to own such product. Personally, even if I did have the money to own one of these iPads, I most likely would not own one. Because I personally do not see the point in owning such a thing. I have a very nice laptop, which suits my needs perfectly. I also do not see the point in owning something like this, and then having to own a iPhone or something similar, why not just put a camera and the ability to make phone calls in it as well? Again that is wonderful power of personal freedom and choice.
Now I could yammer on here about how the some of the Democrats and the socialists want to do away with all this freedom and change the system we have here in America. But I think everyone that reads this knows my position on those subjects. It also is not lost on me, where this thing is produced and the political positions of some of the people that will own one of these things. However, I will not bring that into this discussion here, as I am blogging about an iPad. 😉 😀 😛
Update #2: Message to AllahPundit: Do you really want to be known as the dude who owns a electronic gadget, who’s name basically invokes thoughts of a Electronic Maxi-Pad or Internet Maxi-Pad? Not if you are Beta-Male. I mean, you are already being called a candy-ass Rhino as it is; you do not need anymore help. I’m just sayin’ 😛
Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) is afraid that the U.S. Territory of Guam is going to “tip over and capsize” due to overpopulation.
Johnson expressed his worries during a House Armed Services Committee hearing on the defense budget Thursday.
Addressing Adm. Robert Willard, who commands the Navy’s Pacific Fleet, Johnson made a tippy motion with his hands and said sternly, “My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize.”
Willard paused and said: “We don’t anticipate that.”
Poor Willard! I bet he was about bust a gut laughing. 😆 I know I would be! 😀
As for the Representative:
Reached for comment, a spokesman for Johnson said the lawmaker had visited Guam, and his concern was that the influx of military personnel would overwhelm the island’s infrastructure and ecosystem.
Okay I get that. But the island itself tipping over?!??! Whoa Boy! 🙄
Now, I will rightly point out, as AllahPundit did observe, the man does have a bit of a, um, problem? So, I will go easy on him. But it is still very funny. 😛
Finally, the stupid socialist is doing something right:
The Obama administration is proposing to open vast expanses of water along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time, officials said Tuesday.
The proposal — a compromise that will please oil companies and domestic drilling advocates but anger some residents of affected states and many environmental organizations — would end a longstanding moratorium on oil exploration along the East Coast from the northern tip of Delaware to the central coast of Florida, covering 167 million acres of ocean.
Under the plan, the coastline from New Jersey northward would remain closed to all oil and gas activity. So would the Pacific Coast, from Mexico to the Canadian border.
The environmentally sensitive Bristol Bay in southwestern Alaska would be protected and no drilling would be allowed under the plan, officials said. But large tracts in the Chukchi Sea and Beaufort Sea in the Arctic Ocean north of Alaska — nearly 130 million acres — would be eligible for exploration and drilling after extensive studies.
The proposal is to be announced by President Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar at Andrews Air Force Base in Maryland on Wednesday, but administration officials agreed to preview the details on the condition that they not be identified.
The proposal is intended to reduce dependence on oil imports, generate revenue from the sale of offshore leases and help win political support for comprehensive energy and climate legislation.
My confusion, then, is over the administration’s negotiating tactics. In February, the president cleared the way for the first new U.S. nuclear power plants in more than 30 years. Today, the president will reportedly open up new opportunities for coastal drilling.
In other words, Obama has already effectively given Republicans what they wanted on energy. What is he getting in return?
My question is, why the fuck should he get anything in return, at all?
He better be fucking hoping and praying that we don’t make his origin of birth a big issue when the Republicans take back the house and senate come 2010! What assholes… like the Republicans owe that floppy eared son-of-a- bitch anything at all. 😡 🙄
Again, I say, good on ol’ big ears for finally learning that capitalism is a good thing and that drilling is a good idea. Now if we could just teach the REST of liberal and socialist, and communist America that! We’d have to start in the fucking oval office first!
Cookie Consent
We use cookies to improve your experience on our site. By using our site, you consent to cookies.
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests
10 minutes
__utmb
Used to distinguish new sessions and visits. This cookie is set when the GA.js javascript library is loaded and there is no existing __utmb cookie. The cookie is updated every time data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
30 minutes after last activity
__utmc
Used only with old Urchin versions of Google Analytics and not with GA.js. Was used to distinguish between new sessions and visits at the end of a session.
End of session (browser)
__utmz
Contains information about the traffic source or campaign that directed user to the website. The cookie is set when the GA.js javascript is loaded and updated when data is sent to the Google Anaytics server
6 months after last activity
__utmv
Contains custom information set by the web developer via the _setCustomVar method in Google Analytics. This cookie is updated every time new data is sent to the Google Analytics server.
2 years after last activity
__utmx
Used to determine whether a user is included in an A / B or Multivariate test.
18 months
_ga
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gali
Used by Google Analytics to determine which links on a page are being clicked
30 seconds
_ga_
ID used to identify users
2 years
_gid
ID used to identify users for 24 hours after last activity
24 hours
_gat
Used to monitor number of Google Analytics server requests when using Google Tag Manager
1 minute
_gac_
Contains information related to marketing campaigns of the user. These are shared with Google AdWords / Google Ads when the Google Ads and Google Analytics accounts are linked together.
