Archive for the ‘journalism’ category

Chris Dorner’s Unredacted “Manifesto”

9 February, 2013

christopher-jordan-dorner_0

It’s no surprise to any of us that the Lame Stream Media (LSM) does its best to hide any photos of  L.A. cop killer Chris Dorner in his police uniform.  Instead, they flood the airwaves with images of him dressed in camouflage and military uniforms.  It’s all propaganda designed to influence public opinion by casting the military, veterans, and patriotic Americans in the worst light possible.

However, I ‘ve recently noticed a more disturbing trend:  The LSM has been busy redacting his “manifesto!”

Apparently, the Lame Stream Media is rewriting history by removing such gems as:

– Pro Gun Control

– Loves Obama

– Loves Piers Morgan,

– Fan of CNN and MSNBC

– Pro LGBT and Queer Marrriage

– Thinks Trayvon Martin should have cracked George Zimmerman’s skull open

… Which, of course, is exactly what Trayvon was trying to do, thus Zimmerman used his hand gun and shot in self defense.  But, I digress…

Anyway,  because the Lame Stream Media is once again engaged in a cover-up, I’ve decided to post the entire “manifesto” as I originally found it a few days ago.

In reading his manifesto, I unequivocally, without a doubt, believe Chris Dorner was wrongfully terminated by a corrupt LAPD hierarchy merely for blowing the whistle on “The Chupacabra.”  

Sure, I understand that the hotel workers at Doubletree Inn say that there was no police brutality, but, Chris Dorner believes he saw police brutality and saw fit to report it to his superiors.  It doesn’t matter if he was right or wrong about what he believes he saw.  What matters is that his supervisors fired him for bringing the incident to their attention.  That’s no way to run a police department.

For that, the LAPD absolutely needs to answer and those responsible for firing him need to be fired themselves!

However, that still doesn’t give Chris Dorner the right to go out and take the lives of others in a warped attempt at clearing his good name!

Anyway, I still haven’t been able to thoroughly read through his “manifesto”  without my eyes glazing over and my head feeling like someone is pounding on it with a jack-hammer.  But, if you think you are brave enough, have a go at it:

“Feb 4, 2013 9:14:04 AM Last Resort
From: Christopher Jordan Dorner /7648
To: America
Subj: Last resort
Regarding CF# 07-004281
I know most of you who personally know me are in disbelief to hear from media reports that I am suspected of committing such horrendous murders and have taken drastic and shocking actions in the last couple of days. You are saying to yourself that this is completely out of character of the man you knew who always wore a smile wherever he was seen. I know I will be villified by the LAPD and the media. Unfortunately, this is a necessary evil that I do not enjoy but must partake and complete for substantial change to occur within the LAPD and reclaim my name. The department has not changed since the Rampart and Rodney King days. It has gotten worse. The consent decree should never have been lifted. The only thing that has evolved from the consent decree is those officers involved in the Rampart scandal and Rodney King incidents have since promoted to supervisor, commanders, and command staff, and executive positions.

The question is, what would you do to clear your name?

(more…)

Project Veritas: Journalists and Politicians Refuse to Display Gun Free Signs in Their Yards

15 January, 2013

James O’Keefe strikes again!

The setup: 

1)  Make some signs that say, “HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE.”

2) Locate some pro-gun control reporters and politicians.

3) Ask them to proudly display the signs on their lawns.

Hilarity ensues:

 

 

 

 

Liberal NYT’s Writer Has An Epiphany: Maybe Conservatives Are Right About Welfare

10 December, 2012

Well… Duh!  

If you give a lab rat a chunk of cheese every time it sits in a maze doing nothing, and then don’t reward it when it actually does manage to complete the maze, your rat is going to learn fairly quickly that the best thing it can do to ensure its continued survival is absolutely diddly squat:

Welfare Net

NYT: Conservatives May Have a Point About Welfare Dependency
via Breitbart

In an eyebrow raising article, liberal New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof offered a startling concession: “This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire.”

Writing from Jackson, Kentucky, Mr. Kristof reported that numerous poor parents in Appalachian hill country are yanking their kids out of literacy classes in order to bag a $689 monthly Supplemental Security Income (S.S.I.) check per kid. The checks continue until the child reaches 18 years of age.

“The kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to lose the check,” said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. “It’s heartbreaking.”

Cornell University Economics Professor Richard V. Burkhauser says parents are inducing illiteracy to keep the taxpayer-funded welfare checks rolling in. “One of the ways you get on this program is having problems in school. If you do better in school, you threaten the income of the parents. It’s a terrible incentive,” said Professor Burkhauser.

Such government dependency, says local school district official Melanie Stevens, traps poor children and families in a cycle of taxpayer-funded dependency that replaces dreams with welfare checks: “The greatest challenge we face as educators is how to break that dependency on government. In second grade, they have a dream. In seventh grade, they have a plan.”

[…]

Conservatives have long advocated marriage as the best anti-poverty program going. The logic is simple: two paychecks are twice as much as one.

Radical feminists, however, have eschewed such economic logic, suggesting that the two-parent model is patriarchal and outmoded. As the former head of the National Organization for Women (NOW) Kim Gandy put it, “Marrying women off to get them out of poverty is not only backward, it is insulting to women.”

But the New York Times’ Kristof appears to have found religion on the economic and developmental virtues of marriage as well: “A growing body of careful research suggests that the most effective strategy is to work early on children and education, and to try to encourage and sustain marriage,” Kristof writes.

The New York Times is by no means changing its ideological stripes. But Mr. Kristof deserves a hat tip for acknowledging what conservatives have known for decades: marriage reduces poverty, and boundless welfare vaporizes human flourishing.

George Zimmerman Files Lawsuit Against NBC for Misleading Edits and Reports Painting Him as a Racist

8 December, 2012

Go get ’em, George!  Make those bastards pay through the nose ’till they drop dead!

zimmerman_scene_photo

Top 10 Excerpts from Zimmerman vs. NBC News Complaint
by John Sexton – Breitbart’s Big Journalism

On Thursday, George Zimmerman filed suit against NBC News and three NBC producers he accuses of intentionally painting him as a racist. Zimmerman and his attorneys have now done what many in the new media only dream of doing, holding the major media responsible for their biased and misleading output.

The language in the complaint is blunt. It calls NBC’s coverage “yellow journalism” and refers to “journalistic crimes.” Most broadly, the complaint accuses NBC of trumping up a racism narrative for ratings, with a name check of the Today Show and Rev. Al Sharpton in particular. Here are some of the highlights or, if you prefer, the media’s lowlights from the complaint:

  • NBC saw the death of Trayvon Martin not as a tragedy but as an opportunity to increase ratings, and so set about to create the myth that George Zimmerman was a racist and predatory villain. Their goal was simple: keep their viewers alarmed, and thus always watching, by menacing them with a reprehensible series of imaginary and exaggerated racist claims.
  • NBC created this false and defamatory mis-impression using the oldest form of yellow journalism: manipulating Zimmerman’s own words, splicing together disparate parts of the recording to create the illusion of statements that Zimmerman never actually made.
  • Defendants pounced on the Zimmerman/Martin matter because they knew this tragedy could be, with proper sensationalizing and manipulation, a racial poweder keg that could result in months, if not years, of topics for their failing news programs, particularly the plummeting ratings for their ailing Today Show.
  • The defendants media arson was ignited on March 19, 2012, when NBC and defendant [Jeff] Burside broadcast from Sanford, Florida the first manipulated audio of the call.
  • Defendants’ improper juxtaposition of unrelated dialogue between Zimmerman and the dispatcher was specifically done to imply that Zimmerman had a racist motive.
  • Only after defendants’ malicious acts were uncovered and exposed by other media outlets…did defendant NBC “apologize” and terminate some of those in its employ responsible for the yellow journalism identified in this Complaint.
  • In addition to portraying Zimmerman as a racist via their manipulative editing, the defendants also falsely claimed, without any legitimate basis — and in spite of what the Sanford police had concluded — that Zimmerman also stated a “racial epithet” during the call.
  • Only after other news and internet media identified these outrageous manipulations did NBC address them, with a sham “investigation” that attempted to sweep their yellow journalism — intended to exacerbate racial tensions, at the expense of Zimmerman and the truth — under the rug; NBC’s President, Steve Capus, made a bogus non-apology that claimed the doctoring was merely a “mistake.”
  • All of the defendant’s actions have substantially contributed to a media frenzy including rallies provoked by NBC personnel such as the Reverend Al Sharpton (and employee of NBC, who reported on his own rallies on behalf of NBC) and public misunderstanding which has caused severe damage to the plaintiff, including death threats and a bounty for his capture.
  • Due to the defendants’ journalistic crimes, Zimmerman has been transformed into one of the most hated men in America. Plaintiff seeks substantial compensatory and exemplary damages to punish the defendants for their outrageous fraud upon the public, designed to mislead our nation, create a national uproar, forever ostracize Zimmerman, and taint his jury pool, all to profit and attract attention to their television news programs.

Bob Owens Admits He Got Played by the Lame Stream Media in the Martin-Zimmerman Incident

11 April, 2012

Yeah, I know; another Martin-Zimmerman post. 

However, I feel that this whole affair is a case study in how Leftist politicians, along with their cohorts in the Lame Stream Media, manipulate public opinion in an effort to push their own agendas.  Sadly, it isn’t until much later—long after the damage is done—that the American public finally begins to wake up to the fact that they’ve been hornswoggled by a bunch of Lefturd muckraking flimflammers.

Kinda’ reminds me of an Old West lynching mob:

H/T – TGUSA for being the first to reference “The Ox-Bow Incident” in conjunction with the Martin-Zimmerman Incident.

Why I Called George Zimmerman a Murderer, and Why I Was Wrong
I won’t get fooled by media again.
by Bob Owens – April 11, 2012 – PJM

On March 17, I thought I had it all figured out. I wrote a post on my blog in which I pronounced America’s most famous neighborhood watch captain guilty:

Martin, a wispy 17-year-old-black teen, was walking to the home he was staying in after going to the convenience store for a bag of candy and a Coke. George Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, stalked Martin from his car, and then well, you can read the rest.

It seems self-evident from the 911 tapes that he was psyching himself up to justify a confrontation. Zimmerman initiated the confrontation by leaving his vehicle. He then asks us to believe — absent any living witness to conflict with him — that a teen some 100 lbs. lighter than him started a fight, and that Zimmerman “had” to shoot the kid in self-defense. Does anyone but Zimmerman’s father — and an apparently incompetent Sanford PD — buy Zimmerman’s claim this was a justifiable case of self-defense?

I’ll admit that I do not know the idiosyncrasies of Florida law, but if an armed person initiates a conflict, then uses that conflict as an excuse to draw his weapon and kill the person he confronted, that sounds a lot like murder in my book. No wonder Martin’s parents are furious that the Sanford PD hasn’t filed charges against Zimmerman.

In light of the just released 911 tapes, which suggest Martin plead for his life before Zimmerman fired a second, killing shot, both Zimmerman and the Sanford PD better prepare for very expensive civil rights cases, and hope that a vigilante doesn’t act to correct a perceived injustice as some have already threatened.

How naive that post now seems. The narrative created by the media at that time was one of an innocent life taken for no reason at all, by a much older, heavier, and racist man itching for a confrontation.

That was before we found out there was only one gunshot and no coup de grâce. That was before we found out that George Zimmerman had not deluged the local police with 46 paranoid 911 calls in one year, but 46 calls over a period of eight years, which isn’t unreasonable for a community watch volunteer. The media had either lied about how often he called, or purposefully compressed the timeline.

That was before we learned that Zimmerman didn’t know Martin’s race when he made the call, and that race didn’t play a roll in any of the 911 calls the local police had on file.

That was before we discovered that George Zimmerman wasn’t the 240-plus pound bruiser in the five-year-old picture the media used as much as possible, but was listed at a much smaller 170 pounds by none other than the New York Times. That’s a nominal 20 pounds heavier than a teen that stood four inches over him.

That was before we found out that two eyewitnesses placed Martin on top of Zimmerman as the aggressor, and that at least one of them claims it was Zimmerman crying for help.

That was before ABC News attempted to claim police surveillance video disproved Zimmerman’s claim of being injured in what may have been a purposeful deception. (more…)

CNN Labels Conservatives Palin, Gingrich, and Rubio as ‘Wingnuts’ – UPDATED

14 June, 2011

Yup.  Nothing like impartiality in journalism:


I guess they skipped right over the part in the Journalist’s Creed where it says, “I believe that […] accuracy and fairness are fundamental to good journalism,” and went right to, “[…] a journalist should write only what he holds in his heart to be true.”

Of course, the secondary issue to all of this is the hypocrisy of Libtards and Lefturds;  They go around trying to tell us that we shouldn’t use words like “retarded” and that verbal bullying is killing our children, yet they have no problem bullying Conservatives by labeling them  “Wingnuts” or “Whores.”

H/T – Newsbusters

UPDATE: CNN tries to hide their bias.

Yup, in an obvious attempt at damage control, CNN changes the headline.  However, CNN now implies that Conservatives are retards by saying that they are “goofy.”  Way to go there, CNN.   EPIC FAIL, you stupid Lefturd morons!

Tennessee: KFC and Kroger Drop Local Newspaper After Reading “Islam is Evil” Column

1 July, 2010

Yup, nothing like a bunch of corporate dhimmitards deciding what you can and cannot read:

Newspaper, Businesses Feud in Tennessee Over Claims of ‘Hate Rhetoric’

By Diane Macedo – FOX News

A small Tennessee-based newspaper has become the center of a free speech firestorm after it was banned from a grocery store chain and a KFC for allegedly publishing “hate” speech.

The Rutherford Reader, a family owned and operated business, runs feature columns of local interest, many of which lately have related to controversy surrounding a mosque being built in Rutherford County.

The columns didn’t sit well with at least one patron who complained to several companies that they amounted to hate speech after a guest columnist in April referred to Islam as “evil.” One month later, the Reader was dropped from Kroger grocery stores, and soon after from a local KFC.

Now the paper is threatening to sue, saying this is a blatant breach of its First Amendment rights.

“When a group or individual can force a corporation to take something out of their store which is printed material and not offensive, then we’re headed in the wrong direction,” Pete Doughtie, the Rutherford Reader’s co-owner and publisher, told FoxNews.com.

But the Reader’s material was offensive, Kroger concluded.

(more…)

Olbermann is so Mind-Numbing Stupid, He Actually Thinks ‘Federal Budget Debt a Good Thing’

10 February, 2010

Or, maybe he’s just humping Obama’s leg to such an extent that he can’t even think straight.  How else do you explain him praising the destruction of America and erroneously calling the Federal Budget Deficit the, “Federal Budget Debt?”

Perhaps I need to replace our “Journalism” Tag with a new category:  Gerbilism…

Libtards Eat Crow in O’Keefe Arrest

28 January, 2010

Sorry to harsh your mellow, Libtards, but it appears that James O’Keefe wasn’t trying to spy on Senator Landrieu after all:

Why tamper with Landrieu’s phones?
Mark Murray – MSNBC

From NBC’s Pete Williams

A law enforcement official says the four men arrested for attempting to tamper with the phones in the New Orleans office of Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) were not trying to intercept or wiretap the calls.

Instead, the official says, the men, led by conservative videomaker James O’Keefe, wanted to see how her local office staff would respond if the phones were inoperative. They were apparently motivated, the official says, by criticism that when Sen. Landrieu became a big player in the health care debate, people in Louisiana were having a hard time getting through on the phones to register their views.

That is, the official says, what led the four men to pull this stunt — to see how the local staffers would react if the phones went out. Would the staff just laugh it off, or would they express great concern that local folks couldn’t get through?

New York Times Decides it’s Time to Take the High Road—Won’t Publish “Climategate” Emails

23 November, 2009

The hypocrisy of the New York Times never ceases to amaze meOf course, it should also be pointed out that email correspondence between the New York Times and the Asinine Global Warmists is contained withing these leaked files…

NYTimes: We Won’t Publish “Statements that Were Never Intended for the Public Eye.”
Posted by Michael Goldfarb – The Weekly Standard

With the release of hundreds of emails by scientists advocates of global warming showing obvious and entirely inappropriate collusion by the authors — including attempts to suppress dissent, to punish journals that publish peer-reviewed studies casting doubt on global warming, and to manipulate data to bolster their own arguments — even the New York Times is forced to concede that “the documents will undoubtedly raise questions about the quality of research on some specific questions and the actions of some scientists.” But apparently the paper’s environmental blog, Dot Earth, is taking a pass on publishing any of the documents and emails that are now circulating. Andrew Revkin, the author of that blog, writes,

The documents appear to have been acquired illegally and contain all manner of private information and statements that were never intended for the public eye, so they won’t be posted here.

This is the position of the New York Times when given the chance to publish sensitive information that might hinder the liberal agenda. Of course, when the choice is between publishing classified information that might endanger the lives of U.S. troops in the field or intelligence programs vital to national security, that information is published without hesitation by the nation’s paper of record. But in this case — the documents were “never intended for the public eye,” so the New York Times will take a pass. I guess that policy wasn’t in place when Neil Sheehan was working at the paper.

As a journalist, there is no greater glory than publishing materials that were not meant to be published. If I could, I would only publish emails and documents that were never meant to see the light of day — though, unlike the New York Times, I draw the line at jeopardizing the lives of American troops rather than jeopardizing the contrived “consensus” on global warming.

If Revkin’s position is that he will not reproduce publicly available emails simply because they put the authors — whom he happens to agree with and whose increasingly questionable agenda he happens to support — in a bad light, than he ought to consider another career.


%d bloggers like this: