Saturday, 19 May 2007
GUEST COMMENTARY: ED MORRISSEY
Here is Ed Morrissey, from the invaluable website www.captainsquarters.blog.com,
analyzing the latest "palestinian cease-fire" and what's really going on over
there. As usual, he is right on target. Thanks Mr. M:-
The two major Palestinian factions reached
yet another cease-fire in their slide towards total civil war in Gaza this
morning. Mahmoud Abbas reached out to international Hamas head Khaled Mashaal,
who directed Hamas to negotiate with the Fatah leader:
Negotiators from the rival Hamas
and Fatah movements reached a new cease-fire deal Saturday, a senior aide to
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said.
The agreement was worked out in a meeting at
the Egyptian Embassy in Gaza, said the official, who spoke on condition of
anonymity because he is not authorized to discuss the matter with
Previous agreements reached in the past week
of deadly factional fighting quickly collapsed, and it was not clear if this
one would hold. Under the new truce agreement, both sides pledged to pull
their fighters off the streets and to exchange hostages later
Of course, we've seen these cease-fires
before, and they usually last long enough to get more ammunition to the street
fighters. While the opening salvos of this latest war between the two groups
showed high-level command and real tactics when Hamas attacked the Karni
crossing and the presidential compound, it has descended into gang warfare on
the streets. It's questionable whether those foot soldiers have enough
discipline to stop shooting at each other for longer than that, now that the
hostilities have broken out in a real way.
Hamas has other reasons to seek a peace
besides altruistic desire for unity with the rest of the Palestinians. Shortly
after launching their war against Fatah, they also attacked Israel in an attempt
to gain the sympathy of the people of Gaza. They wanted to use an Israeli
invasion to motivate the Gazans to rally to the Hamas banner, and even attempted
to paint Fatah as collaborators ahead of time.
Israel didn't bite. Instead of the full-scale
invasion Hamas thought they'd get, Israel has used some good intel to
selectively hit only Hamas assets in the field. Hamas has complained that Israel
is playing favorites -- I'm not kidding about that -- but it has taken the steam
out of the Hamas offensive. Israel's response to Hamas' accusations can be
summed up thusly: We don't care who wins as long as it's not
A series of Israeli air strikes has
driven Hamas fighters out of their bases and prompted accusations that Israel
is helping Fatah.
Peretz insisted Israel is not interfering in
the internal fighting. However, he also said that "we certainly would like the
moderate forces to emerge with the upper hand," a reference to
Fifty people are dead in Gaza. What services
they had have come to a standstill. Garbage piles in the streets, commerce has
shut down until this morning, food and supplies can't come through the
crossings; it's a self-imposed catastrophe. While their people starve,
Palestinian leadership try to kill Palestinians; while their infrastructure
collapses, theie engineers try to squeeze more yardage out of their Kassams.
This is what happens when a protostate puts terrorists in
Think they've learned anything
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS AT ITS VERY WORST
Unlike a good many others in the blogosphere, I do not consider the
Associated Press (AP) an organization that second-naturedly takes the leftward
side in its reportage. I acknowledge it does so often, the organization's
hands are by no means clean in this regard. But to be honest, my biggest
problem with the AP is that media which subscribe to them (which is to say just
about everyone) cherry-pick their stories so that just one side gets
In this instance, however, the AP is absolutely guilty as charged.
Please read this story, which I assure you is sanitized into a tiny fraction of
the horror these two innocent young people were subjected to, and I'll show you
Bloggers say media coverage is
Postings claim news outlets refuse to cover case
of crime against whites by blacks.
BY DUNCAN MANSFIELD
KNOXVILLE, Tenn. - In a powerful demonstration of
the way the Internet has opened up the mainstream media to intensive
second-guessing, bloggers are charging that news outlets have ignored the rape
and murder of a young Knoxville couple because of the racial implications of
The two victims were white; the five defendants are
The critics include mainstream
conservatives, such as the National Review, and white supremacists.
They have drawn comparisons to the Duke lacrosse rape case and wondered why
the killings of Channon Christian, a 21-year-old University of Tennessee
student, and her 23-year-old boyfriend Christopher Newsom are not getting the
same attention from what the bloggers regard sneeringly as the liberal
"Oh, thats right, the victims were WHITE!" several
conservative blogs have observed.
Local media in Knoxville have covered developments
in the carjacking case since the bodies were found, and The Associated Press
transmitted stories nationally.
"The Internet has been basically chastising the
mainstream mediasince the Internet opened up," said Aly Colon at the Poynter
Institute, a journalism think tank in St. Petersburg.
Christian and Newsom were last seen Jan. 6. They
were carjacked as they were leaving a friend's apartment. Newsoms shot and
burned body was found the next day along the railroad tracks, and Christians
corpse was discovered two days later in a trash can at a house rented by one
of the defendants. Both had been sexually assaulted. Household cleaner had
been poured in her mouth to remove evidence, according to court
Some Internet postings have suggested the killings
should be treated as a hate crime. But Police Chief Sterling Owen said: "We
have no evidence to support the notion that this was a race-based crime. We
see this as a cold-blooded murder." -
Ok, let's start with the obvious. Five Black men carjacked a White
couple, then raped, tortured and killed them (the torture part was left out by
the AP. I will detail it further on). Suppose Five White men had
done this to a Black couple? Do you have any doubt, even 1/10th of 1%,
that this would be reported in racial terms? Of course not.
Now let's think about the passage I put in bold
print: The critics include mainstream
conservatives, such as the National Review, and white
supremacists. What is the AP communicating to
you? That there is an equivalence in status and in position of mainstream
conservatives and White supremacists, that's what. They are put in the
Yes, it is true that mainstream conservatives sometimes have opinions similar
to those of White Supremacists. It is also true that Hitler believed in
paper currency and street lights. That didn't make him equivalent to the
Allies, did it? The fact that some people coincide on individual issues is
fool's gold when it comes to comparisons like this.
Did you ever see any dispatch from the AP that said "the critics include
mainstream liberals, such as the New York Times, and communists?" Nope,
and I doubt that you ever will. This phony baloney comparison is on a
decidedly one-way street.
Finally, just so you would make less of it, the AP was
nice enough to omit the actual details of what happened to these two young
people. Reading it makes a decent person's stomach crawl. It is
unspeakable that anyone would have
to live through it.
Here are the details, from James H. Lilley of www.baltimorereporter.com (there are
numerous other sources as well). WARNING: If you can't take
genuinely gut turning sickness, don't read it - this is not meant rhetorically, you really shouldn't:-
On Saturday January 6, 2007 Hugh Christopher
Newsom, age 23 and Channon Gail Christian, age 21, both students at the
University of Tennessee went out on a date.
They were driving in Channons Toyota 4-Runner
when they were carjacked at gunpoint. Suddenly the crime turned far more savage
than an armed car theft. Chris and Channon were kidnapped and driven to 2316
Chipman Street where they were forced into the home at gunpoint. While Channon
was forced to watch, her boyfriend was raped prison style and then his penis was
cut off. He was later driven to nearby railroad tracks where he was shot and set
afire. But Channons hell was just beginning. She was beaten; gang raped
repeatedly in many ways, had one of her breasts cut off and bleach poured down
her throat to destroy DNA evidenceall while she was still alive. To add to
Channons degradation the suspects took turns urinating on her. They too set her
body afire, apparently inside the residence, but for some reason left her body
therein five separate trash bags. -
Remember when Don Imus's description of Black
members of the Rutgers' women's basketball team as "nappy-headed ho's" was first
page news for over a week? This racial incident is 1,000,000 times worse.
It happened almost a HALF YEAR AGO. And there has been virtually no
news about it outside of the local area. Sad to say, the most logical
reason is that the colors of the people involved were in the wrong order.
Racism takes many forms. And one of them is altering news coverage based on who is White and
who is Black. This, to me, is a classic example.
DESPERATELY SEEKING IMPEACHMENT
The Bush administration has about a year and a half to go. All of it
will be with a Democratic opposition congress that, obviously, is not
going to sign off on any partisan initiatives it proposes. Frankly, Reid
and Pelosi-Ricardo seem determined to do as little as possible even on
issues that are not partisan - or shouldn't be.
If that were the end of the political gamesmanship it would be
reasonably fair and reasonably predictable. It's how the game is played. But
there is a lunatic left mega-moonbat brigade out there that cannot sleep at night unless they are attacking someone or something
to their right (which is to say just about everyone and everything). To
this end, they are desperately seeking a way - any way - of impeaching
Let me say at this point that impeachment is certainly legal and certainly
reasonable if impeachable offenses have been committed. For example, four
articles of impeachment were brought against President Clinton. (Given the
ignorance and dysinformation about Clinton's impeachment, it is possible that
some readers must think this means he was charged with getting four blow jobs
from Monica Lewinsky. If so, I urge you to finally, at long last READ the
articles of impeachment and see if you can find anything about sex of any kind
in them. Trust me, you can't).
But the reality that these people can't seem to come to
grips with, is that there isn't actually anything President Bush has done that is impeachable. Yawping out things
like "he lied about Iraq" may be good for the mega-moonbat soul, but most of the "lies" they refer to are actually
their own, not President Bush's. Illustratively, Bush never said Iraq was
an imminent threat. The "16 words" in his state of the union speech about
Iraq attempting to buy yellowcake uranium were absolutely true (the first five were "The British
Government has learned...." -- that's a little something these looney-tunes don't
want you to know). The "Downing Street Memos" ended as an issue the second someone
asked to see the original copies. They apparently are being held
with the proof that Bush missed a couple of National
Guard meetings 35 years ago, etc. etc. and so on.
With this in mind, Here is a commentary from www.newsbusters.org which talks about
what lengths this bunch would go to for impeachment. It is both
laughable and pathetic. I urge you to not only read it for the
entertainment/amusement value, but please, please click on the link at the end
and see just how full-moon crazed these people are:
Desperately Grasps At Yet Another Impeachment Straw
P.J. Gladnick on May 19, 2007 - 08:24.
As the clock ticks down on the Bush
administration, the leftwing blogosphere is becoming ever more infected with
fever to often comedic
effect. In just the past week there have been almost 5 dozen Daily Kos
threads on the topic of impeachment alone. Most of these impeachment
threads lack the vital element of legal grounds for impeachment so the leftwing
nutroots have to be very creative to justify this course of action. The latest
of the leftwing grounds for impeachment is a real doozy: Bush did NOT lie. I kid
you not. When Bush was asked by a reporter if he sent his chief of staff and
legal counsel to ailing Attorney General John Ashcroft's hospital room in March
2004 to sign a reauthorization of an electronic surveillance program, he
anwered that it was an important program. And now the nutroots are running with
the notion that Bush's non-lie is grounds for impeachment as can be seen in many
of the comments in this Daily Kos thread, WE GOT HIM!!!
Let history record that Kelly O'Donnell of
NBC News was the first journalist to ask George W. Bush the question that will
end his presidency.
We need to halt the nation's business until
we get an answer to this question.
The beginning of the end for him, to
directly lie to the people. People get pissed. Bush left it unsaid, which is
good enough for good 'publicans.
Bush did not lie - he stuck out his tongue,
said, "I'm not gonna answer, and you yellow-bellied Dems can't make me do it,
because you can't make me do anything," and that is good enough for the
Congress is perfectly entitled to draw an
adverse . . . inference from that evasion/non-answer.
Back in 1998, liberal legal scholars
were claiming that perjury is not gounds for impeachment. However, now that Bush
is President, liberals are now saying that NOT lying is grounds for
impeachment. This premise is not only prevalent in the Daily Kos but
in much of the leftwing blogosphere as well. Despite the initial enthusiasm for
this bizarre premise, it now looks like the left will have to start looking for
another impeachment straw to grasp at. It seems the enthusiasm for
impeachment over a non-lie that was at fever pitch on Thursday has already
started to wane.
This Daily Kos impeachment straw
thread has over 600 overenthusiastic replies but if you want to see
just the comedic gems harvested from their latest impeachment fever frenzy,
check out the DUmmie FUnnies.