Marine)Recruiter stages counter-demonstration

Marine)Recruiter stages counter-demonstration (See #40. Let’s give Sgt. Chamburs a warm welcome!)
The Daily World (Aberdeen WA) ^ | 2/22/07
Posted on 02/22/2007 4:20:05 PM PST by llevrok

Tori Kovach of Aberdeen, left, is a regular feature on downtown streets, often seen near the Wishkah Bridge holding signs protesting the war in Iraq or chastising President Bush. On Wednesday, Sgt. Brendan Chamburs, the Marine Corps recruiter stationed in Aberdeen, saw Kovach holding a protest sign near Quizno’s and decided to stage a counter-demonstration.

He had his sign made at Coast Line Signs. Kovach was unmoved, saying, “I believe in the military, but I think the military is being misused. They are dying for a lie.” A few people honked their horns as they drove by, but not everyone was inclined to support free speech. Before Sgt. Chamburs showed up, someone threw an egg at Kovach from a passing car, hitting his sign.

Friday, February 23, 2007

When it Comes to Role Models, Allah Knows Best

Area Muslims are planning to join hands with renowned Jew-hater and race-baiter Louis Farrakhan.

According to today’s Detroit News, (“Imam accepts Farrakhan’s invitation to give sermon in Detroit today”):

The Islamic Society of North America, which represents orthodox, mostly immigrant Muslims, will join ailing Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan this weekend in Detroit at what is billed as his final major address.

Imam Siraj Wahhaj, a longtime member of the Islamic Society, said he has accepted Farrakhan’s invitation to give a sermon at prayers today, two days before the minister’s Sunday speech at Ford Field, the Islamic Society said from its headquarters in Plainfield, Ind.

The Islamic Society’s participation is significant because mainstream Muslims have considered the Nation heretical. Among their many differences, the Nation has promoted black supremacy, while mainstream Islam teaches racial unity. However, in recent years Farrakhan has adopted more orthodox teachings and has tried to build ties with other Muslims.

It’s no wonder that mainstream Muslims have considered the NOI heretical, in view of the NOI’s other distinctive views that:

· African-Americans are God’s chosen people.
· African-Americans should live separately from whites.
· Allah appeared on Earth in the form of W. Fard Muhammad in 1930.
· They do not believe in war or that they should be forced to participate in wars.

It is also fundamental NOI doctrine that “Yakub, a black scientist, created the white race 6,000 years ago.” I won’t even get into the whole spaceship thing. I did think that was a nice touch how Detroit News writer Gregg Krupa summarizes the differences between the NOI and orthodox Islam as NOI promoting black supremacy, “while mainstream Islam teaches racial unity.” That sounds like Islam in a nutshell to me.

The Islamic Society of North America’s website gave this explanation for cooperating in all of this, (“ISNA ACCEPTS MINISTER FARRAKHAN’S INVITATION”):

Commenting on this historic event, Imam Siraj Wahhaj, a long standing member of ISNA, emphasized that Islam’s mission to humanity “is to call to the path of God, with ‘wisdom and beautiful preaching’.” God makes clear, he said, that He responds to those who take one step toward Him by taking several toward them; and that He is best at distinguishing between those who stray and those who are righteous. He went on to say: “To that end and after taking naseehah (consultation) with Muslim leaders of the Ahl as-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah in America generally. . .I have chosen to accept the Minister’s invitation to deliver the Khutbat al-Jum’ah (Friday worship sermon). We pray that nothing but good will come from it.”

And Allah knows best.

But I don’t mean to be too hard on Muslims for being ecumenical towards the NOI, because at least they all acknowledge the Koran, and believe that there is no God but Allah. (Although NOI believes the black race gave birth to Allah 6,000 years ago, and He is the mightiest God since creation born after Yakub.)

What is more perplexing to me, and I commented on it earlier in the week, is the swooning that strikes Detroit’s black leaders at the mention of Farrakhan’s name, including nonMuslim, black Christian leaders. For instance, there’s the Rev. Sam Bullock, president of the Council of Baptist Pastors, who appeared at the NOI press conference last week announcing this weekend’s annual NOI convention, saying “we seek to move beyond our theology and embrace our humanity, this event is significant because this is the birthplace of the Nation of Islam.”

Black politicans can’t get enough of the Minister, (all his fans call him “Minister”), like Detroit City Councilwoman JoAnn Watson calling Farrakhan a “role model,” (“After Farrakhan, who will fill void?”), and Councilwoman Monica Conyers giving the NOI credit for the re-election of Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick.

Among role model Farrakhan’s more edifying statements have been a description of Judaism as “a gutter religion”, characterising Christianity as an oppressive faith linked to the slavery of black people and calling Adolf Hitler “great”, although he said later that he had meant “wickedly great“.

After Hurricane Katrina, he also told his followers “levees in New Orleans may have been deliberately ‘blown up’ to kill the city’s black population.”

We’re so lucky to have him.

Cheney criticizes China’s arms buildup

Cheney criticizes China’s arms buildup

SYDNEY, Australia (AP) — China’s recent anti-satellite weapons test and its continued military buildup are “not consistent” with its stated aim of a peaceful rise as a global power, Vice President Dick Cheney said Friday.

In a speech in Sydney, Cheney also expressed wariness about North Korea’s commitment to a landmark deal on ending its nuclear programs.

As anti-war demonstrators clashed with police outside the hotel where Cheney was speaking, the vice president also expressed gratitude to Australia for sending troops to the Iraq war, which he said must be won or terrorists would be emboldened worldwide.

Cheney praised China for playing an “especially important” role in the negotiations that resulted in the North Korea deal, under which the North is to seal its main nuclear reactor and allow international inspections in exchange for fuel oil.

“Other actions by the Chinese government send a different message,” Cheney told the Australian-American Leadership Dialogue, a private organization that promotes ties between the two countries.

“Last month’s anti-satellite test, China’s continued fast-paced military buildup are less constructive and are not consistent with China’s stated goal of a peaceful rise,” he said.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Cheney’s remarks. Many government offices were closed Friday for the weeklong Lunar New Year holiday.

Beijing previously said its Jan. 11 firing of a missile into a defunct weather satellite was for scientific purposes, but the test was widely criticized as a provocative demonstration of China’s growing military clout.

Washington said the test – which made China only the third nation after the United States and Russia to use weapons beyond the atmosphere – undermined efforts to keep weapons out of space. Beijing countered by saying the United States is blocking a possible global treaty that would ban weapons in space.

China’s military has grown rapidly along with its economy in recent years, prompting concern that the balance of military power in the Pacific could start to shift away from the United States.

China said in late December it was strengthening its military to thwart any attempt by Taiwan to push for independence, but vowed it was committed to the peaceful development of its 2.3 million-strong military, the world’s largest.

Regarding the North Korea deal, Cheney said it represented “a first hopeful step” that would “bring us closer” to a nuclear-free Korean peninsula – but he also sounded a note of caution.

“We go into this deal with our eyes open,” he said. “In light of North Korea’s missile test last July, its nuclear test in October and its record of proliferation and human rights abuses, the regime in Pyongyang has much to prove.”

Cheney, a key backer of the Iraq war, praised Prime Minister John Howard for sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan, saying Australians had won the respect of the world through their support of the fight against terror.

“The notion that free countries can turn our backs on what happens in places like Afghanistan or Iraq or any other possible safe haven for terrorists is an option that we simply cannot indulge,” he said.

He said that if the U.S.-led coalition leaves Iraq before domestic forces can handle security, violence among rival factions would spread throughout the country and beyond.

“Having tasted victory in Iraq, jihadists would look for new missions,” joining the Taliban fighting in Afghanistan and spreading “sorrow and discord” across the Middle East and further afield, he said.

“Such chaos and mounting danger does not have to occur. It is, however, the enemy’s objective,” Cheney said. “For the sake of our own long-term security, we have a duty to stand in their way.”

Outside, about 100 protesters waved placards saying “Go home Cheney” and “Bring the troops home.” Three people were arrested after scuffles broke out and officers on horseback moved in to disperse the crowd.

Cheney later visited a military barracks in Sydney and held talks with a group of Australian troops who had served overseas. He also met with opposition leader Kevin Rudd, who wants a timetable set for withdrawing Australian troops from Iraq and faster action to deal David Hicks, an Australian who has been jailed without trial at the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for more than five years.

Gore’s Film an Oscar Favorite but Violates Academy Standards, Critics Say

Gore’s Film an Oscar Favorite but Violates Academy Standards, Critics Say
By Kevin Mooney Staff Writer
February 22, 2007

( – Al Gore’s movie on climate change is likely to win an Oscar for best documentary on Sunday even though it arguably violates the Academy’s own criteria and should be disqualified, critics say.

But, they argue, the way in which the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts and Sciences has handled the issue in the past shows a clear political bias.

Documentaries that distort reality and shade the truth are insulated from criticism so long as they advance left-wing causes like global warming and gun control, said independent filmmaker Dan Gifford, a former Oscar nominee and Emmy Award winner.

According to the “rule 12” standard for documentary films established by the Academy, while it is permissible to employ storytelling devices such as re-enactments, stock footage, stills and animations, the emphasis must be on fact and not fiction.

The critics argue that in the case of “An Inconvenient Truth,” the criteria are not met.

One point of contention in Gore’s movie is animated footage of a polar bear struggling to find stable sea ice. Gore has argued that human-induced global warming is directly impacting polar bears’ habitat and sea ice in particular. Consequently, he suggests, polar bears are forced to swim longer distances and sometimes drown in the process.

“A new scientific study shows that for the first time they’re finding polar bears that have actually drowned swimming long distances – up to sixty miles – to find the ice,” Gore says in the movie.

John Berlau, author of a new book on the environmental movement entitled “Eco-Freaks,” claims the polar bear scene alone should disqualify Gore’s film from consideration for best documentary, because it departs from reality.

Berlau noted that while the movie’s companion book says the bears were drowning in “significant numbers,” the study Gore is most likely referring to only found four polar bear carcasses in the sea off Alaska.

That episode took place after a severe storm, he noted, but Gore makes no reference to a storm during the film’s animated polar bear sequence.

Gore also never cites a source for his polar bear claim, Berlau points out, but scientists on both sides of the polar bear debate told Cybercast News Service he was probably referring to a recent report filed by the U.S. Minerals Management Service.

Researchers with the service in 2004 found four dead polar bears floating in the sea off Alaska but said in a report that the bears “are believed to have drowned as a result of the storm.”

Berlau, an analyst at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) – an organization known for global warming skepticism – who has also written about the entertainment industry, said the polar bear sequence does not square with a large body of scientific evidence.

“The polar bear cartoon was the emotional linchpin of this movie for a lot of people, but the science behind it was not rooted in truth and is a violation of rule 12 on many levels,” Berlau told Cybercast News Service.

“If the context of this film were not something politically correct like global warming, it would not be considered for an award,” he said.

Scientists and animal experts dispute whether polar bear populations are in decline, and if so, whether climate change is the main cause (see related story).

Gore “crosses a line” that takes his documentary from fact to fiction by flatly claiming polar bears are drowning, when in reality, there is no hard evidence to substantiate his claim, Berlau said.

In past years, the Academy has applied “very strong standards against the manipulation of animal scenes in film,” Berlau said.

He cited as an example a 1958 Disney documentary “White Wilderness,” which won an Oscar but was subsequently discredited. Film crew had apparently induced lemmings to jump off a cliff in an effort to highlight the species’ suicidal behavior.

If those standards were still in effect, “An Inconvenient Truth” would be disqualified, Berlau said.

Other more recent examples involving storytelling techniques described in rule 12 include “The Thin Blue Line” (1988) about the shooting of a Dallas police officer, and “Touching the Void” (2005), a film about a near-fatal climb in the Peruvian Andes.

Both films received critical acclaim but, Berlau said, ultimately fell short of serious Oscar contention because the Academy took issue with the use of re-enactments.

‘Gore’s the contrarian’

Another area in the movie that has raised eyebrows is Gore’s suggestion that climate change could lead to a 20-foot sea level rise, jeopardizing coastal areas of the U.S., including Florida and Manhattan.

The film shows computer-generated images of water flowing into New York City and covering the area where the World Trade Center once stood, as Gore draws a link between global warming and 9/11.

“Is it possible that we should prepare against other threats besides terrorists?” he asks. “Maybe we should be concerned about other problems as well.”

But climate experts who have spoken with Cybercast News Service scoff at the “alarmist” claim.

Even the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), supposedly the basis of scientific “consensus” on the issue, does not project sea rise levels anywhere near 20 feet.

Instead, the IPCC predicts a sea level rise by the end of the 21st century of between 0.3 feet and 2.8 feet with a “central value” of 1.5 feet.

Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia, told Cybercast News Service the IPCC estimates avoid the more alarmist positions and are not far off the mark, according to his own estimates.

“I think Al Gore’s out of the mainstream,” Singer said. “He’s a contrarian.”

‘Creative license is necessary’

Michael Shashoua, an entertainment journalist and member of the Gen Art Film Festival Screening Committee in New York City, said rule 12 is legitimate insofar as it encourages documentary makers to hue as close to reality as possible.

But the rule could also be interpreted in such a way that precludes effective films from receiving their due, he told Cybercast News Service.

“Sometimes it is necessary to be subjective when exploring a part of reality and to put your best interpretation on events,” Shashoua said. “Rule 12 should not get in the way so long as the filmmaker is not playing fast and loose with the material. A little creative license is necessary, especially when actual footage is not available.”

Gore’s film passes muster in Shashoua’s view, because the film is built around a college lecture, and it “doesn’t stretch the truth to show Gore using devices in the same manner a professor might.”

Nina Gilden Seavey, director of the Documentary Center at George Washington University in Washington D.C., also does not anticipate any complications for “An Inconvenient Truth” involving rule 12 or any other standards.

Since the thrust of the film is about “Al Gore’s quest,” Seavey said, there should be no contention as long as “nothing is fictionalized about Gore’s quest.”

‘Rule is selectively enforced’

Nonetheless, Gifford, the filmmaker, sees a political agenda behind Gore’s predicted success.

Even if material in Gore’s film is “proven beyond a shadow of doubt to be untrue,” the Academy will not invoke rule 12, because the subject matter is politically correct, Gifford told Cybercast News Service.

“The fact is the Academy doesn’t care. The rule is selectively enforced depending on the politics,” he said.

To back up his argument that ideology is a factor, Gifford pointed to Michael Moore’s film “Bowling for Columbine,” a 2003 Oscar winner for best documentary.

To promote the view that the National Rifle Association (NRA) was indifferent toward shooting victims, Moore “faked scenes” and created a false reality with footage including edited excerpts of speeches by then NRA president Charlton Heston, Gifford charged.

David Hardy, an Arizona attorney and author, has written in depth about the issue of whether Moore’s movie met the definition of a documentary.

Shortly after Moore won the award, Gifford wrote a letter to the Academy urging a probe into the film’s eligibility.

“Should that investigation determine that ‘Bowling for Columbine’ contains, as claimed, fabricated scenes and video of real people that has been edited to manufacture a fictional reality intended to mislead viewers, then the director and producer of this film should be stripped of their award,” he wrote in the letter to Academy executive director Bruce Davis.

“Failure to conduct such an investigation and act according to its findings will diminish the stature of the Oscar, establish an exploitable precedent for future rule violators and be grossly unfair to the other nominees who did follow the rules,” Gifford wrote.

He confirmed Wednesday that he had received no response, written or verbal, from the Academy.

Gore’s movie is likely to be given a free pass, Gifford said, because, like Moore, he has definite left-of-center point of view that resonates with the Academy.


Gifford has himself enjoyed success with documentaries, including an Oscar nomination – and an Emmy Award – for the 1997 film “Waco: The Rules of Engagement.”

He co-produced and narrated the documentary, about the 1993 confrontation between the Branch Davidian sect and the FBI, which ended when the group’s compound was consumed in flames, killing 81 people.

Gifford recalls that the documentary came under fire. Since President Clinton was in office at the time, entertainment industry liberals were inclined to defend the government’s position, he said.

“We were in a place politically and culturally in the 1990s where you were labeled as a right-wing nut to even suggest the government’s official story was untrue,” Gifford said.

“The same ones now saying you can’t trust your government and you can’t trust what they’re saying about Iraq are ones who said it was disloyal and unpatriotic to say you can’t trust your government back in the 1990s,” he added.

Gifford said the Waco documentary withstood the criticism because actual footage was used and compelling evidence introduced.

The office of Laurie David, producer of “An Inconvenient Truth,” declined an invitation to comment, instead referring queries to Paramount Pictures.

Repeated phone calls to Megan Colligan, executive vice-president of publicity for Paramount Vantage, were not returned. Paramount Vantage is the specialty film division of Viacom-owned Paramount Pictures.

Cybercast News Service also contacted Teni Melidonian at the Academy’s public relations department. She indicated that Academy executives were unlikely to comment but did ask for a copy of the story to be emailed to her, to pass on to the appropriate officials. No Academy comment was received.

War Blog

War Blog
By FrontPage Magazine | February 23, 2007


By Ed Morrissey

Syria has embarked on a program to bolster its military after the war last summer in Lebanon, Ha’aretz reported this morning and repeated by the AP. They have begun acquiring heavy weapons from the Russians and the Iranians, including medium-range missiles that threaten just about every possible target in Israel:

Damascus has large numbers of surface-based missiles and long-range rockets, including the Scud-D, capable of reaching nearly any target in Israel, the report said, and the Syrian navy has received new Iranian anti-ship missiles. Haaretz also said Russia was about to sell Syria thousands of advanced anti-tank missiles, despite Israeli charges that in the past Syria has transferred those missiles to Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon.

Syrian officials did not immediately comment on the Israeli reports, but President Bashar Assad said in a television interview immediately after the fighting that Syria was preparing to defend itself. Israeli defense officials confirmed that Syria had ordered new stocks of the anti-tank weapons after noting Hezbollah’s successful use of them against Israeli armor in last summer’s fighting in south Lebanon.

Syria also ordered new supplies of surface-to-sea missiles after Hezbollah used one to hit an Israeli warship, killing four crewmen, off the Lebanese coast last July, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.

The two nations remain at war, although they have not fought it for decades. The Syrians want the Golan Heights back, and the Israelis want the Syrians to stop funding and supplying Hezbollah. The new weapons systems, in fact, seem ideal for that kind of arms transfer, the kind specifically prohibited by UN Security Council Resolution 1701.

It comes as no great shock that the Iranians have begun supplying Syria with more materiel. After all, the Iranians need the money, and they have a tight military alliance with Damascus. Both of them run Hezbollah as a joint project, and the eventual destination of these systems can hardly be doubted.

More surprising, or at least disappointing, is the Russian participation in Syria’s distribution channel to Hassan Nasrallah. After all, they signed off on 1701, and they have to know who will benefit from these weapons sales. It appears that Putin once again has determined that the enemies of the West are his friends, despite the Islamist connections to the insurgencies in the Caucasus. It’s really not much of a surprise to see Moscow taking the side of terrorists and totalitarians, although it should embarrass the Russians themselves.

Bashar Assad recently told Diane Sawyer that the US should engage with Syria to establish a peaceful Iraq. This is the same peace he has in mind for Lebanon and Israel. Until Syria stops being a mule for terrorists, they have no business at the table of a serious peace conference, and neither do Iran and Russia.  Thursday, February 22, 2007




From FOX News: Hillary Clinton, Obama in Hot Exchange Over Hollywood Heavyweight’s Comments.

The war of words between leading 2008 Democratic presidential hopefuls Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama spread Wednesday night, after the campaigns had earlier exchanged heated words when Clinton suggested Obama return funds to Hollywood bigwig David Geffen, who insulted her in a newspaper article. “We aren’t going to get in the middle of a disagreement between the Clintons and someone who was once one of their biggest supporters. It is ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen when was raising them $18 million and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln bedroom,” Obama campaign communications director Robert Gibbs said in a statement that was e-mailed to the news media. …

Geffen, a former “Friend of Bill,” co-hosted a star-studded, $1.3 million fundraiser for Obama on Tuesday night in Beverly Hills with Hollywood heavyweights Steven Spielberg and Jeffrey Katzenberg.

Among the 300 contributors who forked over $2,300 each were George Clooney, Barbra Streisand, Jennifer Aniston, Ben Stiller, Eddie Murphy and Morgan Freeman. Also in attendance were Dixie Chick Natalie Maines and director Ron Howard.

Geffen became a former FOB in 2001 after Bill Clinton refused to pardon Leonard Peltier, a Chippewa Indian convicted of killing two FBI agents in a 1977 shootout on South Dakota’s Pine Ridge Indian Reservation. …

Geffen is apparently still holding a grudge against the Clintons. In remarks to New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd that appeared in Wednesday’s edition, the music producer suggested that the Clintons have had their day and it’s time for new blood in the White House. …  Thursday, February 22, 2007

Battling sharia in Minneapolis

Pelosi’s appalling ignorance

Pelosi’s appalling ignorance
Ed Lasky
Speaker Nancy Pelosi has made and still carries on her website a breathtakingly untrue charge against President Bush:

“Five years after 9/11 and Osama bin Laden is still free and not a single terrorist who planned 9/11 has been caught and brought to justice. President Bush should read the intelligence carefully before giving another misleading speech about progress in the war on terrorism.”
How about Khalid Shaikk Mohammed-the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks? Last time I checked he was imprisoned at Guantanamo Bay. Pelosi clearly doesn’t read the Wall Street Journal or the 9/11 Commission report. Additionally, Abu Zubaydah was captured-the intelligence community believe he ran a terrorist camp in Afghanistan where some of the 9/11 hijackers trained and that he helped smuggle Al Qaeda leaders out of Afghanistan.

No wonder she moved Jane Harman out of the post she deserved on the House Intelligence Committee and chose to appoint Silvestre Reyes (who cannot tell “Shiite from Sunni”) in her stead. Pelosi clearly doesn’t want to be upstaged! Third-in-line to the Presidency and she cannot even get her facts right about 9/11.

Maybe Ms. Pelosi and Silvestre Reyes should take this new ABC News poll that measures basic knowledge about the differences between the Shiite and Sunni branches of Islam.
Posted at 09:52 AM | Email | Permalink