Monday, 29 January 2007

CULTURE OF CORRUPTION. DEMOCRATIC-STYLE. ONCE AGAIN.

Ken Berwitz

Here's a fun little article I read today.  I wonder how much time the network news, the Today show or the chronically PMS'ed Chris Mouthews and Keith Ohbrothermann will give it:

-

Pelosi Fails To Disclose Role In Family Charity: Paper

NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and two other prominent Democrats have failed to disclose they are officers of family charities, in violation of a law requiring members of Congress to report non-profit leadership roles, USA Today reported in its Monday editions.

Rep. Rahm Emanuel of Illinois, the fourth-ranking House Democrat, and Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana also did not report they serve as family foundation directors, according to financial disclosure reports examined by USA TODAY.

All three foundations are funded and controlled by the lawmakers and their spouses, and do not solicit donations from outside sources.

Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly said Friday the speaker will amend her reports. He said it "was an oversight" that she had not listed her position dating back to 1992.

Emanuel, chairman of the House Democratic Conference, does not believe the law requires him to disclose his foundation post, spokeswoman Kathleen Connery said.

Stanley Brand, a former House general counsel, said the 1978 federal ethics law does not allow lawmakers to omit their positions with family non-profits, the paper reported.

-

Let's think about this:  Nancy Pelosi is that nice speaker of the house who had to "revise" tens of thousands of dollars in travel expenses during the Tom DeLay scandal (translation:  She changed her BS explanation of where the money came from before they came after her too).  Her family operates a foundation that takes no money from anyone outside of the family and is entirely controlled by the family.  So does Rahm Emmanuel.  So does Evan Bayh. 

And - most amazingly - neither Ms. Pelosi nor Mr. Emmanuel nor Mr. Bayh have disclosed their status as officers in these closed-off foundations, even though the law apparently is crystal-clear about the fact that they have to do so.

Pelosi in particular, claims it was just a matter of oversight.  Tell you what;  as oversights go this one is pretty impressive, since it goes back to 1992.  The same inadvertent oversight every year for 15 years. 

We are talking about an unbelievably rich woman (with her husband Pelosi is worth an absolute minimum of $25,000,000 dollars, probably far more) who certainly has the most capable, knowledgeable accountants money can buy (who do you THINK she uses for her finances?  Uncle Louie from the Bronx?).  But the same mistake keeps on being made year after year for 15 years.  A mistake that the law is perfectly clear about. 

Even more amazingly, Congressperson Emmanuel and Senator Bayh have exactly the same "oversight" problem for THEIR foundations, which are ALSO entirely controlled by the family and have no outsiders putting any money in. 

Does the term "tax dodge" ring a bell?   A very, very loud bell? 

Watch the network news tonight.  Then watch Mouthews and Ohbrothermann.  Then watch the Today show tomorrow morning.  See how much time they spend on this story. 

Think of it as another lesson in the ongoing educational series, "Our Unbiased Media".


WHICH SIDE IS CBS ON?

Ken Berwitz

Which side is CBS on?  It's a very provocative question.  But - and I wish for everyone's sake that this were not so - it is also a legitimate question.

I am posting an article I read this morning at newsbusters.org.  I urge you to look at the two video links it provides as I did.

One video is a hit piece on the USA, our military and the way both are performing in Iraq.  No surprise there; for CBS and many other major media venues this is standard issue reportage.  

The second, however, is from an al qaeda propaganda site.  And if you look at it you will find that CBS used the SAME VIDEO as al qaeda to "prove" there were Iraqi soldiers shot multiple numbers of times. 

Was the footage real?  Where they really soldiers?  Did they get up and wipe red dye from themselves after the footage was shot?  Would you put any of this past al qaeda? 

Here is the article, with its links to both videos.  You decide:

-

CBS Report Uses al Qaeda Propaganda Film, Claims It's 'CBS Obtained'

Posted by Warner Todd Huston on January 29, 2007 - 03:31.

So, here is a question: Why is CBS using propaganda film originally posted on an al Qaeda website and claiming it is merely "CBS obtained" with no mention of the actual source for Lara Logan's report on The "Battle of Haifa Street"?

The anti-Iraq website called Iraqslogger posted a story about how CBS reporter Lara Logan is crying that CBS seems to have spiked her "Haifa Street" story. Logan has sent out a mass email to all her friends and colleagues in the world of journalism in hopes that they will pressure CBS to show her report that has not yet made it to TV. It has, though, appeared on the internet.

In her email, Logan claims that this story is "largely being ignored" and she asks for her pals to email CBS to get them to air it. But she urged supporters not to mention her "request" to pressure the network to air the piece if they did so. I guess she feels like begging is unseemly.... even though she is doing it anyway.

But, Iraq watcher, Nibras Kazimi a Visiting Scholar at the Hudson Institute in Washington DC., noticed something strange about Logan's piece.

Kazimi seems to have discovered that some of the film in Logan's piece is the exact footage that first appeared on an al Qaeda sponsored website. Yet during the CBS piece they claim is is just "footage obtained by CBS" and they do not mention its original appearance on the al Qaeda site.

Says Kazimi:

Al-Qaeda's Islamic State of Iraq released 8 minutes of cell phone footage through its media arm, the Al-Furqan Institute for Media Productions, under the title 'Some of the Casualties of the Heretics in Haifa Street After Sundays Fighting, January 7, 2007, in Baghdad.' The grainy images were of six or seven bodies wearing Iraqi military fatigues with 'carry-out' lunch boxes strewn about them.
So, the big question is, why is CBS not telling viewers that the film used is al Qaeda propaganda? And, further, why don't they mention that this fighting was claimed by al Qaeda as their handiwork? Why does CBS just call the fighters "insurgents"?

Worse, the piece contains a purported civilian denouncing the Americans. This so-called man on the street also does not mention al Qaeda's participation in the fighting.

Does CBS have enough friendly contact with al Qaeda to get their video and propaganda? If so, why don't they tell us this is so? Why the smoke screen with the film being benignly termed "CBS obtained"? Why the refusal to mention al Qaeda at all?

Are they trying to somehow screen al Qaeda's work from the American people?

I have seen the video and it sure looks the same to me.

You be the judge:

View CBS report here

Download al Qaeda video here

-

As you can see, the video CBS incorporated into their report was lifted straight from al qaeda's website.  But their only attribution was "CBS obtained". 

There is no reference whatsoever to the fact that the source of "CBS obtained" video hates the USA, hates western civilization and hates news organizations like CBS (I wonder if they ever think about that).  You're not supposed to know the video comes from people whose objective is to present a "story" - whether real or staged - that will demoralize us so that we might leave Iraq to their insane, murderous control.

Here's a riddle for you:  What do you call it when a news venue puts out enemy propaganda, without so much as a word to indicate who provided it, so that viewers will have no reason to doubt its legitimacy?   

Do you find yourself hesitating to answer my riddle?  Do you feel that if you do you've somehow dirtied yourself?  You'd be "right wing"?  Are you afraid that if you repeated the answer at a gathering of friends they'd talk about you afterwards, shake their heads and write you off as being "one of them"? 

If so, you are not you anymore.  You  are a wholly owned subsidiary of the people who tell you what to think.  The people who make you ashamed to acknowledge what is right in front of your eyes.  The people who have convinced you that the plain truth is embarrassing to YOU, not THEM.

They're very good at this, aren't they?   


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!