FightTheBias.com Newsletter Issue #24



Newsletter - Edition #24 10/14/2001 Newsletter - Edition #24 Click Here to Subscribe To Our Free E-mail Newsletter IN THIS EDITION #24 TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CALENDAR. TIME FOR LIMITED CENSORSHIP? – by Michael Savage OH MY GOODNESS --- THAT PROFESSOR’S POSITION HAS MADE ME UNCOMFORTABLE. MORE FROM OUR WONDERFUL OMNIPOTENT, ALL-WISE COLLEGE STUDENTS. YOU JUST CAN’T BELIEVE THE TALIBAN. NOW DO YOU ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THE UN IS USELESS --- EVEN DANGEROUS? MORE ANTI-GUN NONSENSE FROM THE WASHINGTON POST. TOM RIDGE DOESN'T GET IT...FROM DAY ONE. MAJOR NETWORKS SPIKE COMMERCIAL ADVOCATING ARMED PILOTS. REMEMBER "LEAKY LEAHY? FURTHER READING TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CALENDAR It’s a calendar that was printed in Egypt --- last May. Do you see that city in the background? It’s New York. You can clearly see the airplane crashing. Translate the Arabic on the calendar and you get “I am supported by Allah, to die for Allah.” The calendar was discovered in an Islamic grade school in Almere, Netherlands. The head of this Islamic school had a good supply of these calendars, presumably for her children. When local authorities and media presented her with a copy of the calendar she shouted, “How did you get this?” before she went silent. There is every reason to believe that many are teaching their children to hate America and to die in the cause of killing Americans. TIME FOR LIMITED CENSORSHIP? – by Michael Savage How do you like watching Arab Propaganda television in your home? How do you feel about it? How do you feel about little Wolfy Blitzer sitting there, running with some dirty filthy pirate in a nightshirt and what this pirate has to say about our bombing mission, giving it the moral equivalency of our President? This is the part that drives me crazy. Don't you understand that the same Wolf Blitzers, the same CNN double-talkers, have wrecked American society? Here's what they do: They take a cop who has been in a shootout with a bank robber, then they ask the policeman his point of view. They then go to the scum who just held up the bank and they give you his point of view, making it a morally equivalent argument and making it seem as though there is no difference between the cop and the bank robber. Now the media lemmings are doing exactly the same with these pirates in filthy nightshirts. These pirates are lying through their teeth. You can see them through their beards. They make it up and stumble, "Eeeehhh Uhhhhh, and the U.S. bombed us and they meant to hit the military, but they hit civilians." Why don't they just hold up the children that THEY shot in the head, 'cause that's coming next. They'll shoot a whole village up themselves and say that we did it. It's unbelievable to me. I'll tell you the truth. I live off of freedom of speech. I'm the man who opposes censorship of any kind. But I must tell you, we are at war. And we're at war for our lives. You think this is a joke? You think the outcome of this war is assured? I don't. You're dealing with destructive psychotic forces. I want you to think about that. I want you to compare our civilization to the filthy pirates in dirty nightshirts. They have created nothing for a thousand years. They DESTROY, they CUT THROATS, and they ATTACK. You think about that, you think about that! Compare it to what our civilization has achieved. What have these pirates in dirty nightshirts done? What have they created? What have they produced? They're so sick that they think that cutting the throat of a woman is a creation. They say thank God for blowing up the World Trade Center, and you know why? Because they are impotent men; they're violent, impotent men who can create nothing. Their souls are empty, their souls are void. They have no creativity whatsoever, they're pure destructiveness. And to give them the moral equivalence of our president just breaks my heart. To watch these idiots in the media, run Arab television out of Arabia, is pure propaganda! Arab television, I've got to watch THIS in my living room. I got to watch propaganda films run out of that mud hole called Afghanistan. And I've got to give THAT equal credence to the President of the United States. I mean do you get the picture? I'm calling for censorship. I don't want Arab propaganda television broadcasted into my living room. I don't ever want to see it again. And I am sick of Osama bin Laden's propaganda movies running all over our media. I think that it should be prohibited. You're not watching the truth; you're watching a lie, a filthy lie. A propaganda movie saying thank God for blowing up the World Trade Center. I've got to watch that in my living room because of freedom of the press, because of degenerates in the media that think they’ll get ratings point to run it. Go to hell! That's what I say. OH MY GOODNESS --- THAT PROFESSOR’S POSITION HAS MADE ME UNCOMFORTABLE. With every day that passes we hear stories about the goings-on around our nation’s college campuses that get stranger and stranger. So – you might want to sit down for this one. This happened at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. It seems that one of the professors there actually (gasp!) made some statements in class in support of the concept of a war against international terrorism. Well --- up pops some young female-type student. She has adopted the anti-Americanism of the left and thinks that the United States is actually to blame for the attacks. So, what do we have? We have a disagreement between professor and student. You would think that this would be good and would enhance academic dialogue. But not in this case. The student, you see, is a woman – and the professor is a male. This means that what we have here is not a difference of opinion – its actually sexual harassment. This female student actually complains about the professor and says that his position made her feel “uncomfortable.” The professor then receives visits by the university police and the provost. Can you believe this? A female student feels “uncomfortable” because she doesn’t agree with a professor’s stated opinion on an important matter of public policy, and the cops get called? Wouldn’t you just LOVE to have this person working for you someday? MORE FROM OUR WONDERFUL OMNIPOTENT, ALL-WISE COLLEGE STUDENTS. And this time it’s from Brown University. This is a campus where the annual tuition is around $32,000. That’s right … Mommy and Daddy have to spend upwards of $125,000 to send their precious little babies to Brown for four years. Well, they had a little peace rally at Brown. At the end of this bit I’ve included a link to an article about the rally in the Brown Daily Herald --- I particularly want you to read some of the responses to the article. But first --- a few points of interest. The article says the students were chanting “1,2,3,4, we don’t want a racist war.” Racist? Where does this “racist” thing come from. It comes from the leftist idea that any action taken by a white person against a person who is not white is a “racist” action if there are negative consequences involved. I think we all know that there probably wasn’t one student in the crowd who could have defined racism. Not, also, the comments made by one Peter Zedrin. Zedrin says that he is a freelance writer in Providence. Then, this gem: “I was cheering when the Pentagon got hit because I know about the brutality of the military. The American flag is nothing but a symbol of hate and should be used for toilet paper for all I care.” If you’ll look into the comments following the article you will see that one person identifies Zedrin as “ .. the guy with dreadlocks who hangs out on Thayer Street selling incense to students.” Freelance writer my left cheek. YOU JUST CAN’T BELIEVE THE TALIBAN. After attacks on the Taliban and Bin Laden’s worms we are hearing many claims about losses inflicted on civilians. The other morning we heard about damage to a UN office and a woman’s hospital … all delivered in good English. Remember – the only media that is allowed in these areas are reporters and sources friendly to the Taliban and Bin Laden. In other words – their words are propaganda. As for the civilian casualties – there are reports that the Taliban were inviting Afghan citizens to return to Kabul … saying all was safe. Now why would they do this? So that these citizens can be killed in US bombing raids, that’s why. You can’t get civilian casualties if there are no civilians around. NOW DO YOU ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THE U.N. IS USELESS --- EVEN DANGEROUS? Amazingly, Syria has been made a member of the United Nations Security Council. The world recognizes that Syria has been a huge sponsor of terrorism and terrorist groups for decades … and now it’s on the UN Security Council? Can anyone take the United Nations seriously any more? Any objective look at the UN will reveal an organization that has been basically anti-American and anti-freedom for decades. After all, this is an organization that created a Declaration of Human Rights which says that all human rights are to be subjugated to the goals and purposes of the UN. UN first, human rights second. After the war against terrorism has shown some positive results the United States ought to give some serious consideration to (1) getting the UN headquarters out of the United States; and (2) getting the US out of the UN. MORE ANTI-GUN NONSENSE FROM THE WASHINGTON POST. The leftists at the Washington Post must be convulsing in fear that so many Americans are rushing to arm themselves nowadays. Just look at the Post's consensus editorial, "Home-Front Arsenals," from Tuesday. The editors note with alarm that more and more guns are making their way into homes. They conclude with the following sentence: "Advocates of armed self-defense point to other news reports of people pulling out guns and fending off attackers, but many studies--and common sense--point up the far greater dangers of having handguns in the home." No doubt the Post is referring to the now-infamously sloppy work by Dr. Arthur Kellerman. He reported in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1993 that you're more 43 times more likely to shoot someone in your family than a criminal. He also wrote that he could not find statistics to support "evidence of a protective benefit from gun ownership." But Kellerman's research is fatally flawed because it fails to count self-defense cases where the gun was never fired! And the gun is never fired in 98 percent of self-defense cases. That means simply displaying a gun to your would-be attacker is enough to stop the crime from happening. Then there's Post columnist Courtland Milloy. The title of his op-ed piece is "In D.C., the Gun is Still Terror's Weapon of Choice." He recounts the story of two young men who had a run-in with armed thugs. He writes that "in urban America, the handgun is a proven weapon of mass destruction, and there is no terror quite like staring down the barrel of one." The message we're getting from the Washington Post is the same leftist mantra they and other gun grabbers have been repeating for years: Guns are dangerous. They can kill you or a loved one. Terrorists use them. They're the tools of the bad guys! Yet there's never a mention of the positive aspects of gun ownership by law-abiding citizens. About 7,000 times a day, Americans use guns to protect their lives and their property. Crime rates in states where people are allowed to carry concealed weapons are lower than states that don't allow concealed carry. John Lott, author of "More Guns, Less Crime," says that in "shall-issue" states--where the state has to issue you a concealed carry permit if you meet the requirements--mass shootings were virtually eliminated within four to five years after the "shall-issue" law took effect. Yet despite mountains of evidence that guns deter terrorists and common thugs, the Washington Post continues to discourage its readers from taking up the tools of effective self-defense. The Post's editors are badly out of touch with the reality--and the necessity--of an armed populace. http://www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/WP/arsenal.htm TOM RIDGE DOESN'T GET IT...FROM DAY ONE. Take a good look at this quote. It's an excerpt from the speech Tom Ridge gave the other day during his swearing-in ceremony as head of America's new Office of Homeland Security: "Finally, as the President stated, we will continue to secure liberty, as we secure this nation. Liberty is the most precious gift we offer to our citizens. It's what the terrorists fear most, what they tried to destroy on September 11th. We will work to ensure that the essential liberty of the American people is protected, that terrorists will not take away our way of life." What's wrong with this picture? Let's look at that second sentence again. "Liberty is the most precious gift we offer to our citizens." Does that sound anything like what we've heard from the big-government statists in recent years? Bill Clinton comes to mind. Leftists in this country have been trying for decades to foster the mistaken belief that Americans receive their freedom from the government--when, in fact, the government exists to protect the freedoms that all Americans have from the minute they're born. To say that the government gives citizens their freedom is to promote the very dangerous idea that those personal liberties can be taken away by a simple act of legislation or a presidential executive order. It doesn't work that way, no matter how hard Bill Clinton tried--and regardless of what Tom Ridge thinks. If this is how Tom Ridge sees things, then hang on to your hats...we're in for a bumpy ride here in the Homeland. MAJOR NETWORKS SPIKE COMMERCIAL ADVOCATING ARMED PILOTS. In the days following September 11, the Front Sight Firearms Training Institute stepped up to the plate. For those of you who don't know, Front Sight teaches private citizens and public servants how to use guns defensively at their facilities in Las Vegas, Nevada. Front Sight offered to train each and every commercial pilot in the world how to use a gun defensively. They offered to do this completely free of charge. They're willing to contribute up to $150 million to train commercial airline pilots--and it won't cost the government, taxpayers, airlines, or airline passengers a dime. So the Front Sight Founder's Society paid for a 60-second commercial encouraging Americans to contact President Bush, the FAA, and the airlines to demand that commercial pilots be armed. The ad also mentions Front Sight's offer of free defensive handgun training for pilots. The commercial was sent to the major TV networks to be run during prime time. According to Front Sight, the TV networks don't want to touch the ad with a 10-foot pole. Are we really that surprised? These same networks use their news programs to try to convince Americans that guns are bad. Guns are dangerous. They kill people. Even the prime-time entertainment shows slip anti-gun messages into their scripts. There were several shows ("ER," for one) whose season finales last spring dealt with mass shootings. The networks are bending over backwards to meet the anti-gun lobby. They couldn't possibly show the American people the overwhelming statistical evidence that guns save lives--not even when armed pilots or passengers would most likely have been able to fend off the hijackers on September 11. Arming people just doesn't fit with the liberal agenda. Front Sight isn't about to stop promoting its message. They're re-working the ad to make it more politically correct. They'll try again next week. Here's hoping they succeed. REMEMBER "LEAKY LEAHY? Okay --- so members of Congress are moaning about how President Bush has restricted his top-secret briefings to the top four members of the House and the top four members of the Senate--eight out of a total of 535 elected representatives and senators. There are those of you who think Bush has made a big mistake. This would be a good time to remember the story of how Patrick Leahy, Democratic Senator from Vermont, got the nickname "Leaky Leahy." Flash back to the 1980s. Ronald Reagan was making war against terrorism. At the time, Leahy was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. He didn't like some of Reagan's classified strategies. He threatened to sabotage them. According to the San Diego Union-Tribune, Leahy did just that in a 1985 television interview. He disclosed the news that there had been an intercept of one of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak's telephone conversations. The information gleaned from this conversation was used in the operation to capture the Arab terrorists who had hijacked the Achille Lauro cruise ship and killed American citizens. The Union-Tribune says Leahy's little indiscretion may have cost the life of at least one of the Egyptian operatives involved in the operation. Patrick Leahy did it again a couple of years later. There's a July 1987 report by the Washington Times that says Leahy leaked information on the Reagan administration's covert plan to put Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddhafi out of power in 1986. Leahy disliked the plan so much that he threatened to expose the operation to then-CIA Director William Casey. And weeks later, the plan had to be scrapped--because details of the operation somehow made it to the Washington Post. Then, in 1987, Leahy was at it again. Just before the Iran-Contra hearings were to begin, he allowed an NBC reporter to look through the Senate Intelligence Committee's confidential draft report on the scandal. NBC used the inside information in a report in January 1987. Following a six-month internal investigation, Leahy was forced to step down from his seat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. So you can understand now why President Bush doesn't want top-secret information to get out to anyone except to the top members of Congress. It's because of irresponsible people like Patrick Leahy. But he's not the only problem. There are dozens more spotlight-hungry politicians in Congress who want some face time during the war. They're too blinded by their own perceived importance to see that they could endanger lives by leaking secrets to the press. Bravo to President Bush for standing up to Congress on this issue. Loose lips really do sink ships--and get American soldiers killed. http://fightthebias/com/Archives/Issues/24/newsmax/leahy.htm FURTHER READING September 11^th was a good reminder why the death tax is immoral. www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/WSJ/irs_vs_widows.htm Here’s Ann Coulter with a shocker about affirmative action --- and the 12,000 boys named “Osama” in Pakistan. Perhaps we should go ahead and include all males named Adolf, Sadam, Pol, Mao, and Joseph. www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/TH/coulter.htm Democrats Adrift http://www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/RL/tuesday.htm Clinton Showboating Irks Giuliani www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/newsmax/clinton.htm Airplanes & Guns : Myths and Reality www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/KABA/guns&planes.htm Michael Moore's Epiphany www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/misc/michael_moore.htm I Was Wrong About Bush - By Gerald Posner http://www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/WSJ/geraldposner1.htm Saddam Performing Experiments On Political Dissidents. www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/NTCU/germwarfare.htm Hafiz Sadiqulla Hassani – “I crucified people.” http://www.fightthebias.com/Archives/Issues/24/NTCU/torture.htm Neil Boortz is a syndicated talk show host based in Atlanta Georgia. You can visit his website at http://www.boortz.com.