Sibby Online

New York Times propaganda

I just got back from the west coast (that’s the reason for lack of posts). While flying, I was able to finish reading Bob Kohn’s book, “Journalistic Fraud: How The New York Times Distorts the News and Why It Can No Longer Be Trusted”. Kohn presented a strong argument that the New York Times is no longer a newspaper, but a opinion based propaganda tool that promotes anti-Bush and anti-war one-sided and incorrect arguments. What is disturbing is the impact this has world-wide. Here is a recent example from the Channel NEWSASIA web site:

The New York Times called on President George W. Bush to apologize to the American people for going to war on Iraq after an official probe into the September 11 attacks found no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda.

"Now President Bush should apologize to the American people, who were led to believe something different," the Times editorial said.

Instead it is the New York Times who should apologize to the American people, who were led to believe there was no evidence linking Iraq and al-Qaeda. Here is Bill O’Reilly’s argument for that:

Once again we are mislead by some in the press.

I know some of you complain about me, but it’s on days like this that you should appreciate the No Spin Zone.

The 9/11 Commission (search) has come to some conclusions and Thursday newspapers across the country blared headlines.

The New York Times wrote: "Panel Finds No Qaeda-Iraq tie."

The Washington Post put forth: "Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed."

The Los Angeles Times opined: "No Signs of Iraq-Al Qaeda Ties Found."

And even the conservative Wall Street Journal trumpeted: "No Iraq-al Qaeda Link."

But if you read below the headlines you see the Commission said something a bit different: That there was no a collaborative relationship between Saddam and Al Qaeda regarding Sept. 11. That's true, but there were certainly links and ties between Saddam and Al Qaeda and that's provable.

Then is the impact the propaganda has on the masses as exemplified by this transcript from Rush Limbaugh:

CALLER: -- of the opinion that he has created. Yes.

RUSH: Created an opinion? It's your opinion. He didn't create opinion. He stated opinion. If you created an opinion, you formed it on your own based on your bias.

CALLER: Well, I mean Vice President Cheney, even this week said that there are long-standing links between Al-Qaeda and Iraq --

RUSH: There are.

CALLER: Yeah. Well, that creates an impression that there's a strong relationship or that there's a relationship, and the 9/11 commission said categorically --

RUSH: The only problem with that, Robert, is the president himself has always denied a connection between Iraq and Qaeda on 9/11.

CALLER: Well, but he has --

RUSH: So if you want to impeach him for telling the truth about that, I guess you can try it.

CALLER: Well, he has misinformed the American public --

RUSH: No. On what? What did he misinform us about?

CALLER: About weapons of mass destruction, about --

RUSH: Robert. Robert. The British intelligence, the United Nations Security Council, there were something like ten resolutions about weapons of mass destruction. And Bill Clinton in 1998, my man, said the exact same things that George W. Bush said in 2001 and 2002, and John Kerry and Tom Daschle endorsed Clinton in '98 when he said them and wanted to sign a resolution authorizing force against Iraq.

CALLER: The weapons of mass destruction -- I'm just talking about the false claim of uranium from Niger, that one, that was very specific --

RUSH: That was a British government claim, and Bush disowned it in the State of the Union speech.

CALLER: Well, I mean there are many reasons Bush should be impeached, you know, including the torture situation going on --

RUSH: Ah, now we get to it. I can sit here and tell you, Robert, gently and kindly, that every assumption that you've made is erroneous. You are wrong. I'm not going to blame you. I think you're a student of the mainstream press, and they are making things up about this.

Why is the mainstream media ignoring the Prime Minister of Iraq:

Saddam Hussein "always had links with international terrorist organizations." On the face of it, this is not a controversial statement. It comes from a CNN interview of Iyad Allawi, recently chosen as the interim prime minister of Iraq. Allawi expanded on this assessment in a December 31, 2003, interview with CNN's Bill Hemmer, when he estimated that more than 1,000 al Qaeda terrorists were operating in Iraq. But his more interesting comment came moments later. The al Qaeda fighters, he said:

were present in Iraq, they came and they were active in Iraq before the war of liberation. They were inflicting a lot of problems on the--and inflaming the situation in northern Iraq, in Iraq Kurdistan. They killed once about a year and a half ago 42 worshipers in one of the mosques in Harachi [ph] in a very ugly way.

Again, on the surface, this was not a particularly revealing statement. After all, Colin Powell told the United Nations Security Council that al Qaeda was operating in Iraq--almost certainly with the knowledge and approval of the Iraqi regime--before the war. CIA Director George Tenet has testified to the presence of al Qaeda in Iraq on several occasions. Allawi went on:

Those people have had the backing of Saddam prior to liberation, and they remained in Iraq after the collapse, and after the vacuum was created. After the way, they remained in Iraq. Many joined them since then.

Allawi's declaration that the Iraqi regime supported al Qaeda terrorists before the war in Iraq is intriguing not because of the claim itself, but because of the man making it. Allawi for years ran an Iraqi exile group called the Iraqi National Accord. In recent years, he was the Iraqi exile closest to the CIA. And although George Tenet has spoken repeatedly about the prewar Iraq-al Qaeda connection, he has been at odds with many in the bureaucracy beneath him.

UPDATE: The Weekly Standard has a William Kristol column on how John Kerry showed his real intentions as the NYT distorted the Saddam al Qaeda link. Read the whole thing.

Stephen F. Hayes also has a long but very interesing column at The Weekly Standard. Hayes wrote the book, "Connection: How al Qaeda's Collaboration with Saddam Hussein Has Endangered America".

Big Media wants monopoly on free speech

NewsMax reports the NRA has challenged the Big Media monopoly on free speech that was created by the Campaign Finance Reform law:

The National Rifle Association is moving its new NRANews program to satellite radio this week. The New York Times described the broadcast as a "direct challenge to federal limits on political advocacy." The daily radio program offers news and Second Amendment commentary. As a media organization, it is not restricted by federal campaign finance law. That means NRANews may continue broadcasting in the run-up to the November election - at a time when federal law requires political advocacy groups to stop running ads.

"There is no government licensing of journalists. Tom Paine was free to pamphlet. So are we," the newspaper quoted NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre as saying.

LaPierre said the NRA was looking to buy radio stations in the Midwest, the Rockies and the South.

More Moore deception

WorldNetDaily is reporting fewer than expected theatres are showing Michael Moore’s latest anti-American propaganda film. There are already signs of deception:

Move America Forward has viewed footage of the movie and reviewed transcripts from portions of the films. The group claims the movie contains several misleading and inaccurate assertions:

Moore asserts that in the days immediately following the Sept. 11 attacks President Bush whisked Osama bin Laden’s family out of the country because of a secret alliance. Actually, the group points out, terrorism czar Richard Clarke, a strong critic of President Bush, took full responsibility for the unilateral action and said he "would do it again."

Moore, the group says, tried to paint congressmen who voted for the war as hypocrites because their own family members were not being sent to fight in the war on terrorism. Rep. Mark Kennedy, R-Minn., explained to Moore on camera that he has two nephews in the military, one who has just been deployed in the Army National Guard and would be headed to Afghanistan in the next month. Moore cut Kennedy’s response from the film and instead packaged the segment to suggest that Kennedy and other Members of Congress were unwilling to have their own family members serve in the war on terrorism, according to the congressman. Kennedy told the Minneapolis Star Tribune: "It's representative of the fact that Michael Moore doesn't always give the whole story, and he's a master of the misleading."

Moore says his film supports the troops, but then boasted to the London-based newspaper the Guardian that he had sneaked film crews into Iraq to document improper acts committed by soldiers. He then gushed: "Half the movie is about Iraq – we were able to get film crews embedded with American troops without them knowing it was Michael Moore. They are totally f---ed." Last week Moore told the San Francisco Chronicle he was proud of the fact that his film showed our troops as "dazed and confused" and paralyzed with a Vietnam-like syndrome.

Herseth Hoedown

Stephanie Herseth is having a South Dakota Hoedown:

Stephanie has promised the people of South Dakota that she will bring her South Dakota values to DC. In keeping with that promise, you are cordially invited to a reception Welcoming Representative Herseth to Washington with some good ole South Dakota Fun.

Welcome to Washington
Representative Stephanie Herseth
Monday, June 21st
6:30-8:30pm
The Kenneth H. Nash American Legion
224 D Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003

The heading stated, “You are invited to a Herseth Hoedown”. I wonder why they are not having a Herseth pow wow instead?

David Kranz…Daschle’s spin doctor

Today’s David Kranz column covers the statements made by Joshua Greene on Chris Matthews regarding Tom Daschle stepping down as the Democratic leader of the Senate…win or lose in November.

Of course Kranz came to the aid of his college buddy and spun the story and made it look like John Thune propaganda and quoted Greene:

"It was at the end of the show, where guests are invited to engage in wild speculation," Green said. "I don't have a remotely sound basis for it. I am sure the Thune people loved it, but it was idle speculation - something Beltway people spend all too much time engaging in."

To put it in perspective, he said, viewers needed to hear more of the conversation.

"Just before my comments, there was a segment where someone predicted Vice President Cheney will have a convenient heart attack, and he will be replaced by Rudy Giuliani," he said.

Ok…may I speculate. How much of the conversation Kranz had with Greene is included here? Did Kranz take Green out of context. Kranz did that with me in 2002. He only used a small part of what I told him, and then let Tom Daschle spin on it.

While we are on the subject of “wild speculation”, let’s not forget the David Kranz report on the front-page of the Argus Leader proclaiming Tom Daschle is running for President. And...remember the Kranz column that stated Tony Dean was running as a Democrat for the US House seat? A couple of months ago I emailed Kranz and asked him what happened with this. Kranz did not respond.

South Dakota Family Policy Council Press Release

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 15, 2004
CONTACT: Robert Regier 605-335-8100

Senate Passes Unconstitutional Thought Crimes Legislation

SIOUX FALLS—Senators Tom Daschle and Tim Johnson joined 63 other senators today to pass an amendment (S. Amdt. 3183) to the National Defense Authorization Act (S. 2400) that provides federal funding for states to prosecute so-called "hate crimes." The vote was 65-33. Among the other components, the amendment essentially increases federal sentencing guidelines for crimes committed on the basis of bias against the "actual or perceived … gender" and "sexual orientation" of the victim.

"I didn’t know that pushing the homosexual agenda was so critical to our nation’s defense," said South Dakota Family Policy Council executive director Robert Regier. "Our two senators voted for legislation that not only violates the Constitution but flies in the face of the Christian beliefs about homosexuality that most South Dakotans hold.

"Could punishing people for their politically incorrect thoughts be any less of a South Dakota virtue? Is this what our senators are hearing from people in our coffee shops? Seems like they’re more influenced by homosexual interest groups than they are their constituents," Regier added.

"This unconstitutional legislation will have a chilling effect on free speech and religious freedom by making politically incorrect ideas grounds for harsher treatment in criminal proceedings. Yes, criminals ought to be punished to the fullest extent of the law—but for their actions, not their thoughts and opinions," Regier said.

The Party of Treason

If you don't subscribe to Whistle Blower magazine, "The Party of Treason" is a good is issue to start a subscrption:

From an insider look at exactly how Democrats have committed fraud in election after election, to current candidates' self-serving and scandalous communications with enemy and terrorist nations, to a stunning expose of how the Democrat Party has progressively embraced corruption in almost every form, the title of the May issue, "THE PARTY OF TREASON," says it all.

The issue includes:

"The party of my past" by Joseph Farah

"Fascism, corruption and my Democratic Party" by Bob Just, who chronicles the utter transformation of an honorable institution into "the enemy within"

"Dems embrace gangsta culture" by Joseph Farah

"What about Hillary?" – a shocking look at just how this summer's Democratic Convention could end up with Hillary Clinton as the presidential nominee

"How Democrats steal elections" by David Kupelian and Jon E. Dougherty, a revealing and scandalous insider look at the specific techniques Democrats have used for decades to change the outcome of elections

"Terrorists cheer Kerry's rhetoric" by J. Michael Waller, documenting U.S. officials' concerns that al-Qaida is planning attacks within the U.S. to force Bush out of office

"Giving aid and comfort to the enemy" – a true "smoking gun" – in which a former North Vietnamese colonel reveals how Hanoi won the war, and the essential role people like John Kerry played in America's defeat.

"John Kerry and me" by Joseph Farah, a jarring, fact-filled analysis showing that, just as with Bill Clinton, John Kerry holds only one thing sacred – himself

"I dare call it treason" by Ann Coulter, in which the author and columnist justifies the name of her best-selling book, "Treason"

"Israel betrayed: The new cold war" by Bob Just, in which the lifetime Democrat explains why his party is about to turn its back on the Jewish state.

... and much more.

Now Cubans use fake porn

WorldNetDaily broke the story about fake pornography from IraqBabes porn site depicting US soldiers gang raping Iraqi women was being used as Arab propaganda. I have posted their coverage under the media bias index due to the Boston Globe also printing the pictures without reporting that they were fake. Now WorldNetDaily is reporting the Cubans are also using the photos on a web site:

The Cuban government and state-controlled press have disseminated the same bogus GI gang-rape photos that WorldNetDaily reported originated on porn sites.

As previously reported by WND, the publication of the images and stories about the images added confusion to the unfolding Abu Ghraib crisis especially in the Middle East, where top newspapers and political sites published the hard-core porn photos side-by-side with genuine photos of abuse.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cuba has published eight of the gang-rape porn photos under the heading, "Accusing Photos." A link on the Ministry's main page, called "The photos that the US does not want to be seen," ("Las Fotos que EE.UU no quiere que se vean") takes readers to a page that presents real photos of Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse along with the eight fake rape photos, plus three fake photos of abuse by British soldiers which were published but then retracted by the Daily Mirror.
As of publication time, Felipe Pérez Roque, minister of foreign affairs for Cuba, could not be reached for comment. Roque was appointed in May of 1999.

The URL of the Cuban Ministry photo page, "De la Prensa Cubana," suggests the photos were republished from state-controlled media.

Indeed, Diario Granma, the official newspaper of Cuba's Communist Party, published the fake "rape" photos in the online May 7 edition under the title, "Humiliate, beat, torture and murder, these are the rules of American soldiers." (""Humillar, golpear, torturar y asesinar... máximas de los soldados norteamericanos.")

A May 10 story by Jean-Guy Allard, titled "Abu Ghraib prison: The images of horror," contains three of the fake rape photos and is linked to from a special section of the website called Huellas de la 'Liberación' de Iraq ("Traces of Iraq's 'Liberation'").

Underneath the link to Allard's story and a thumbnail photo of a hooded prisoner reads the following: "Images reminiscent of the horrors of Hitler's concentration camps go around the world." ("Imágenes que recuerdan los horrores de los campos de concentración hitlerianos, recorren el mundo.")
Unlike other media outlets that published the staged photos and/or stories about the photos, Allard suggests they are of British, not American soldiers. He writes: "Many pictures are simply revolting, they show Iraqi women being sodomized by British soldiers." ("Muchas fotos son simplemente asquerosas. Enseñan mujeres iraquíes mientras son sodomizadas por soldados de Gran Bretaña.")

The fake rape photos were also published in Juventud Rebelde ("Rebel Youth"), the official newspaper of Cuba's Union of Communist Youth. Juventud Rebelde has a circulation rate second only to Granma. Four of the fake rape photos are published alongside genuine photos of abuse under the title, "Torture, abuse, mistreatment and humiliation." ("Torturas, abusos, maltratos y humillaciones.")

Tom Daschle…John Kerry…Michael Moore

SDP has an interesting post tying Tom Daschle to John Kerry and wonders if Daschle will endorse John Kerry. Hugh Hewitt also has an interesting post tying John Kerry and the Democrats to Michael Moore:

The American Spectator is reporting an unbelievable story: That the Democratic National Committee will purchase a half-million DVDs of Michael Moore's hate-filled, anti-American, French- and Hollywood-approved movie. Of course this has the effect of putting, what, $4 million in Moore's pocket, which would be a nice payday for the leading propagandist of the left.

Of course the DNC sponsorship, if proven true, has the effect of putting John Kerry squarely behind Michael Moore. There is no other way to interpret the backing of the DNC, except as a Kerry-endorsement. Now Moore did wonders for General Clark in the primaries, and is the sort of repulsive figure whom most mainstream Democrats don't want hanging around the party's front door.

But there he is, a sort of Kerry running-mate. So when will the elite media get around to asking Terry McAuliffe --who's under a gag order these days-- whether this is his latest brainstorm?

UPDATE: Caller Leslie from Houston points out that had the RNC purchased a half-million copies of the Clinton Chronicles when that hit-video appeared in the '90s, the media would have melted down in indignation. But of course today's media doesn't really think Moore's a nut. Edgy, maybe, but not a nut.

Even though he's a nut.

Ryne McClaren has an interesting post that substantiates Michael Moore is a nut and has hired a couple of Clinton spin doctors to help with the deception (as if Moore needs any help with that).

The newest member of the Dakota Alliance, Quentin Riggins, has an interesting post on Tom Daschle asking 3rd parties to stay out of South Dakota with their ads.

Since Michael Moore is an outside 3rd party and his fakeumentary is being used by the Democratic Party as an campaign ad…should Daschle publicly ask that Fahrenheit 9/11 not be distributed in South Dakota? Does anybody think David Kranz, the Dean of South Dakota political reporters with 31 years of experience, is on top of this and will have an answer from Tom Daschle in his Wednesday's column? Or is analysis like this only for the blogosphere?

Supreme Court rules on Pledge

WorldNetDaily reports the Supreme Court overruled (again) the 9th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that “under God” was unconstitutional:

The phrase "under God" will remain in the Pledge of Allegience at least temporarily after the Supreme Court ruled 8-0 today an atheist father cannot sue to ban the oath from being recited in schools.

The high court said Californian Michael Newdow, who is in a protracted custody battle over his daughter, lacks legal authority to speak for her.

The ruling overturns a decision two years ago by the San Francisco-based 9th U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which said the "under God" phrase violated the establishment clause of the First Amendment.