By
Who is more annoying: ABC News White House Correspondent Sam Donaldson during the Reagan years or NBC News White House Correspondent David Gregory now?
I think it’s a draw. Either way, it’s clear that David Gregory is the new Sam Donaldson, minus the gazillion wives and penchant for biting, but with the addition of the penchant for calling White House officials “jerk[s].” Also, in Donaldson’s days, there was no internet to counter his anti-Reagan bias and BS. But there was Ronald Reagan, who sure knew how to handle the mercurial contrarian liberal reporter. The best was when Donaldson would yell questions, and Reagan would pretend he could not hear over the noise of Marine One.
Check out Fire David Gregory.

Is David Gregory the New Sam Donaldson (shown with friend)?
(Sam Donaldson anecdote: I met Sam Donaldson in 1984, when Ronald Reagan was running for re-election and made a campaign stop in Michigan. Sam Donaldson came up to me, my sister, and a friend. Unfortunately, they asked him for his autograph. When I did not, he asked me if I wanted his autograph. I said, no thanks. He then grabbed my Reagan campaign sign from me and signed it anyway. Wonder if David Gregory would do that.)

By
Question: How many winners of the Oscar for “Best Original Song” incited violence and “stomping” of people?
Question 2: How many Oscar winners in any Academy Awards category incited violence and “stomping” of people?
Answer to Both: Just one. The Three 6 Mafia (whose members are Jordan “Juicy J” Houston, Paul “D.J. Paul” Beauregard and songwriter Cedric Coleman).
The “artists” who brought us the Oscar-winning, “,” apparently find it “Hard Out Here to Act Like Civilized Human Beings.”
You see, the three Memphis-based rappers who make up the rap group are being sued by one Ramone Williams, who says that at one of their concerts, he was injured after being thrown to the floor, hit with a chair, stomped on and kicked in the face. This happened while Three 6 performed another song from their stellar repertoire, “Let’s Start a Riot.” They apparently encouraged their concert audience to engage in the violence, which caused Williams a fractured jaw.

The classy Three 6 will be deposed in a Pittsburgh courtroom in April.
Oscar winners whose songs encourage violence and serious injury. What’s next–? Oops, they did that, this year (but thankfully, ).

By
With the momentous fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on America less than a half year away, one thing is clear: We are as asleep as ever.
No, make that: as absurd as ever. Asleep would be bad enough. A story in yesterday’s Boston Globe makes it clear that there are far too many fools in America, who aren’t asleep. They’re aiding and abetting the enemy as much as ever.
The Globe writes about two new “documentary plays” (how the heck can a play be a documentary?) that humanize the terrorists–Robin Soans’ “Talking to Terrorists” and Marc Wolf’s one-man show, “The Road Home: Re-Membering America.”
While Wolf’s play doesn’t sound as bad as it could be, Soans’ theatrical presentation is an utter outrage. Read the Globe’s description, and if you are a patriotic American, you’ll surely agree there’s no accounting for good taste in the theaters, these days:

Soans, a London playwright, trains his eye on terrorists themselves.
“I wanted to give voice to people who are usually excluded,” says Soans. “Experts have an angle [when discussing terrorism], but real people don’t have an agenda. They talk about their experience.”

[DS: Al-Qaeda, HAMAS, Islamic Jihad, etc. don’t have an agenda, Huh?]

From April 2004 until January of last year, Soans and his company, Out of Joint Theatre Company, interviewed 80 people involved with terror movements around the world – former terrorists, their victims, and the psychologists, diplomats, and journalists who attempt to make sense of the violence.

[DS: “Out of Joint Theatre Company”? More like “Smoked Too Many Joints.”]

The resulting play, which premiered in England last year, uses the actual words of Soans’ interviewees, most vividly those of the Kurds, Palestinians, Irish, and Ugandans who, mired in an assortment of political struggles, felt they had no choice but to resort to terror. Child soldiers and hardened militia members confide their terrible actions and personal motivations. . . .
“When you hear their stories, and understand better why they did it, you’ll wonder if ‘terrorist’ is the right word to describe them, or if there were extenuating circumstances. You won’t use the word ‘terrorist’ again without thinking twice.”

Nauseating. Time to cancel this London terror-apologist playwright’s visa and put him on the no-fly list.
We hope neither of these plays got subsidies from the tax-funded National Endowment of the Arts or National Endowment of the Humanities. But we would not be surprised if they did.
Thanks to Reader Chip G. for the tip on this dramatic disgrace.

By
This week, The Detroit News a/k/a “The Detroit Spews” ran a piece on “Duped Dads,” men who were defrauded into thinking they were the dad and forced to pay child support even after discovering the truth.
This is nothing new. State laws and courts all over the country have unfairly required men to pay for children that are not theirs, supporting and encouraging the paternity fraud.

What is new and outrageous is that the New York Times “ethicist” has advised that this is ethical. Huh? In his syndicated column, Randy Cohen advises to conceal the truth from a duped dad:

What makes someone a parent is a continuous relationship with the kids, not the mere exchange of genetic material. If I were to learn suddenly that my college-age daughter had been exchanged in her cradle, I’d love her nonetheless.
What’s more, his coming forward would force a confrontation that both parents might wish to avoid. It is not unusual for people to determinedly ignore evidence of infidelity that is obvious to everyone else. There are things people choose not to know, and such information should not be foisted on them.

No-one is saying duped dads should stop caring about the children that are not theirs. But they shouldn’t have to be financially ripped off because someone else defrauded them.
One man in the Detroit Spews story, Michael Williams, is being forced to pay thousands for SEVEN! children, even though he learned that FIVE! of them are not even his. That’s an outrage.
More outrageous is that a New York Times so-called ethicist is advising the continued perpetration of this fraud. Something tells us he’d have a different view if he, too, were paying for five of someone else’s children to the mother who slept around with their fathers.
We guess that’s the breaks when the previous position of this joke of a nationwide “ethics advisor” was writing jokes for the David Letterman show.

By
Yesterday, I wrote about an American hero, –who risked his career to save Americans. Then, there is his exact opposite, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Special Agent in Charge
Apparently the writings on this site have gotten to Abu M.
Last week, in a staff meeting of all of his top lieutanants, Abu Moskowitz was attacking me. I waited several days to write about it to protect the innocent. Abu M was apparently bothered by my , also garnered from the League.
Agents say Moskowitz declared,

She [] is an attorney and should know better . . . . She should be vetting the truth.

Brian Moskowitz: Special Agent in Charge of Something
Actually, I wrote the truth, and the truth hurts. Moskowitz is angry that I pointed out the the pins were either an incredible waste of taxpayer money to reward agents for working for NFL billionaires (instead of rounding up illegal aliens and working for the American people who pay their salaries), or they were an improper gift prohibited by government laws. What is inaccurate about that? Nothing. Moskowitz claims he paid (wasted taxpayer money) for the pins. I did not say he did not. I merely asked who paid for them.
Apparently, Abu Moskowitz is in need of a stronger eyeglass prescription or a good reading comprehension class. He also neglected to mention to his staffers that the clothing given to his agents by the NFL was, in fact, an illegal gratuity. So what say you to that, Abu M?
I wish I could, in fact, ask him directly. But, as he well knows, unlike his suggestion, there is no way to “vet the truth” with him because: 1) long ago, he made it clear that he would repeatedly ; and 2) he’s not exactly the most honest crayon in the Crayola box. Though, he might fit the description of “Burnt Sienna.” While I try hard to verify everything I write (you should see the things about him I have not been able to verify), he knows how to contact me, but won’t.
Abu M allegedly said that the point I made about accepting gifts and gratuities was well taken and is something they should pay attention to. Apparently, only after the NFL goody bags were all doled out.
It brings both a smile and a frown to my face to hear I was the topic of an ICE meeting for agents in Michigan and Ohio, the heart of Islamic America. One doesn’t become a staff meeting topic unless he/she’s having an effect.
On the other hand, it tells me Abu Moskowitz still doesn’t think he has better things to do . . . like going after his Islamist, terrorist money-laundering buddies, something he’s failed to do since he rode his miniature carousel horse into town. One wonders what he thinks is the reason for the creation of “Homeland Security,” other than a new emblem design and a fresh supply of business cards.
Clearly, in his mind, it sure isn’t to keep America safe. So the effect this site is having is not enough, just yet.
While Abu M is universally loathed by his subordinate managers (but for one master-panderer whose initials are IQ, nothing to do with intelligence), that is not the goal of this site. Our goal is to keep America safe and secure from terrorists and other criminals, and we see, instead, a man who is and –all to enhance his career at the expense of Americans.
As one of Moskowitz’s top agents remarked:

Has the SAC [Special Agent in Charge] compromised his ability to initiate terrorist investigations because he has become too cozy with the wrong people? Is he purposely thwarting terrorist efforts in Ohio by withholding investigative resources? In my opinion, he is incompetent and is mismanaging his role in the war on terror.
Abu is spending money like a drunken sailor. Looks like he’s spending it on nice to have stuff, which is legal, just because he has the money. An example is that he is ordering desk name plates for all employees, with special ones for supervisors/managrs. Nice to have, but not on operational necessity.
In my opinion, the problem Abu has with you is that you ask hard
questions, and it doesn’t give him the luxury of not having to answer to anyone. He apparently views you as the enemy, when in fact you are the voice of the people. That has always concerned scoundrels like him.
The fact that he mentions you means that he is concerned about you. To me, Mr. Moskowitz is an arrogant asshole who has no business being the SAC of a federal law enforcement agency. He is referred to by some Headquarters types as “the little big man.”
Terrorism is supposed to be the #1 focus of federal law enforcement, and he wouldn’t know a terrorist if one came up and bit him on the ass. I view the problem stemming in a large part from the formation of ICE. Now the dirty laundry people are in charge of everything.

AMEN. Couldn’t have said it better.

By
On this site, of daytime talk host-atrix Oprah Winfrey on the brain-addled “adults” who watch her and drink in her every utterance.
But now, there appears to be some light at the end of the tunnel. Some good news.
It appears that everything Oprah touches is not gold after all. Friday’s Wall Street Journal detailed the utter market failure of Oprah-endorsed products by her .
So sad, too bad.

Despite Oprah’s phony gushing for an entire 10-minute segment dedicated to Berkus, his product line at Linens ‘n Things isn’t selling. The retailer has been forced to mark a lot of his products down to 75% off to get them off the shelves. All that, disaffirming Oprah’s contrived drooling:

Love the frames, love the lamps, don’t you love these?

Apparently, even the mushy brains of the Oprah audience occasionally get a clue that Oprahisms ain’t the gospel. Like they say, even a broken clock is correct twice a day.
We’re encouraged to see that “Oprah’s Favorite Things” are not always America’s. We’ll be satisfied when Oprah finally retires and her power and influence finally sleep with the fishes, like Luca Brasi.
***
Check out our site: OprahSucks.com.

By
Don’t get caught wearing a Casio watch. And be on the lookout for suspicious acting people who wear one. Especially at the airport.
Not because it’s cheap or not expensive looking (we’re not snobs). But because it’s the new official watch–and explosive device–of Islamic terrorists.
Casios are used as timers in bombs. Those equipped with altermeteres can double as butane lighters. While other cheap watches can also be used, Homeland Security and other agencies are looking for Casios because they are cheap and the watch of choice by terrorists.
That’s why wearing a Casio is cited as evidence against 8 of the terrorist prisoners at Guantanamo Bay. The prisoners claim they just wear Casios because they needed cheap watches to tell time. Just like potential terrorists tried to buy a gazillion disposable cellphones at Southern U.S. Target Stores. They just wanted a cheap cellphone to call Mommy back in the Middle East . . . and use the phones in bombing devices to kill Americans.

Explosive Casio Connection: Ramzi Yousef & Ahmed Ressam
Casios have been used in several bombs, including one used by Ramzi Yousef, architect of the . (Yousef is the nephew of 9/11 Al-Qaeda mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.) Yousef’s Casio was used as a timing device on a 9-volt battery, killing a passenger on a Philippine Airlines Flight. He used this as a dry run for his “Operation Bojinka” (Terror in the Skies) that he was planning.
, the “Millenium Bomber,” bought two Casios (model 1663) to use as timers.
Here’s a tip: Lookout for passengers wearing cheap $30 Casios on your flight. Apparently, all it takes is a quick trip to the airplane bathroom by someone technologically inclined. And voila . . . BOOM!
Did and his Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents look for Casios when they were “monitoring” this year’s Super Bowl in Detroit? Naturally, they did not. Instead, .
For your own protection, look out for the watches. Because they did not and probably aren’t now, either.

By
Last week, we wrote about our new hero, . We wish all federal agents were like him.
Two weeks ago, Samit testified in detail at the death penalty phase of the Zaccarias Moussaoui trial. The counterterrorism agent recounted how he worked desperately to stop terrorist Moussaoui–believed to have been the designated 20th hijacker for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Samit is the real-life version of . But real-life FBI agents have to deal with layers and layers of untalented, useless bureaucratic managers and superiors. And unlike Jack Bauer, those FBI bureaucrats usually succeed in foiling successful terrorism investigations.
Samit’s story mirrors the one we wrote about attempts to foil HAMAS and Al-Qaeda terrorists. We feel their rightful frustration.

American Hero: FBI Special Agent Harry Samit (center)
Samit, a pilot, was sure Moussaoui was involved in a terrorism hijacking plan, but had to resort to a cockamamie scheme to transfer Moussaoui to France in order to search the terrorist’s belongings. Thank Robert Mueller and company for that. Orders from the very top stopped Agent Samit cold.
Yesterday, Special Agent Samit testified again, confirming yet again why he’s an American hero. Even if he did not succeed in stopping Moussaoui’s cohorts, it was not for lack of trying. It was for lack of FBI superiors who are worth a damn.
Here are some excerpts from the Los Angeles Times’ coverage of Agent Harry Samit’s testimony. It is frustrating to read:

The FBI agent who arrested Zacarias Moussaoui weeks before Sept. 11 told a federal jury Monday that his own superiors were guilty of “criminal negligence and obstruction” for blocking his attempts to learn whether the terrorist was part of a larger cell about to hijack planes in the United States.
During intense cross-examination, Special Agent Harry Samit – a witness for the prosecution – accused his bosses of acting only to protect their positions within the FBI. . . .
“They obstructed it,” a still-frustrated Samit told the jury, calling his superiors’ actions a calculated management decision “that cost us the opportunity to stop the attacks.” . . .
Samit said that officials at the FBI headquarters in Washington rejected a series of attempts to obtain a warrant to search Moussaoui’s personal belongings.
Had the belongings been opened before Sept. 11, agents would have found numerous small knives, jumbo-jet pilot manuals, rosters of flight schools and other clues that might have helped them understand the Sept. 11 plot.
Samit wanted to seek a criminal search warrant, and later one from a special intelligence court. But officials at the FBI headquarters refused to let him, because they did not believe he had enough evidence to prove Moussaoui was anything but a wealthy man who had come to this country to follow his dream of becoming a pilot. . . .
He said that as Washington kept telling him there was “no urgency and no threat,” his FBI superiors sent him on “wild goose chases.”
For a while, Samit said, they did not even believe Moussaoui was the same person whom French intelligence sources had identified as a Muslim extremist. Samit said that FBI headquarters wanted him and his fellow agents to spend days poring through Paris phone books to make sure they had the right Moussaoui.
Samit said that when he asked permission to place an Arabic-speaking federal officer as a plant inside Moussaoui’s cell to find out what Moussaoui was up to, Washington said no.
And he said that when he prepared a lengthy memo about Moussaoui for Federal Aviation Administration officials, Washington deleted key sections, including a part connecting Moussaoui with Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.
Samit said he was so frustrated and so convinced that attacks were imminent that he bypassed FBI officials in Washington and met with an FAA officer he knew in Minneapolis. But he said FAA agents never got back to him, and never asked to see a pair of small knives, similar to box cutters, that Samit had found in Moussaoui’s pocket and in his car.
Samit further described how he took it upon himself to cable the Secret Service that the president’s safety might be in jeopardy. He recounted in the cable how Moussaoui had told him he hoped to be able to one day fly a Boeing 747 from London’s Heathrow Airport to New York, and how he also hoped to visit the White House one day.
Samit said he warned the Secret Service that those desires could spell disaster. “If he seizes an airplane from Heathrow to New York City,” Samit alerted the Secret Service, “it will have the fuel on board to reach D.C.”
Samit said he never heard back from the Secret Service either.

This whole episode is an outrage. The FBI failed America on 9/11. Harry Samit risked his career to try to save Americans’ lives, while those above him risked Americans’ lives to enhance their careers.
And look what we have to show for it. More of at the J. Edgar Hoover Building. .
Special Agent Harry Samit, American Hero. FBI brass, American Buffoons.

By
Kudos to Michelle Malkin for being on top of the tragic story of Abdul Rahman and issuing a call to action to save him (here, here, here, and here). He faces the death penalty in Afghanistan for the “crime” of converting to Christianity.
Yup, that Afghanistan. The one where our mostly Christian taxpayers sent a boatload of money and soldiers to install democracy and freedom. Clearly, nothing has changed from the days of the Taliban.
Per instructions and info on Michelle’s site, I called the Embassy of Afghanistan to register my complaint. I was told by the sympathetic Afghani on the other end of the phone that he, too, is upset by this, but there is nothing he or the embassy can do.
The man I spoke with said that they got 50 calls about this today, and that they have no authority to save the man. He said there are only two people who can stop this: Mr. Shinwari, the Chief Justice, who is an old man and an intolerant Taliban remnant; or President Karzai, who can–but has not–removed him.
Nice to know that all our soldiers’ efforts and U.S. funds are being negated by a powerful remnant of the Taliban, not (why?) replaced by Karzai.
There is actually a third man who holds all the cards, President Bush.
Call the White House: 202-456-1111
Call the State Department: 202-647-4000
And call the Embassy of Afghanistan: 202-483-6410
(Or e-mail.)
And register your outrage. Help save the life of this innocent man, Abdul Rahman.
Ironically, Rahman means “the merciful.” It is one of the many names Muslims use for Allah. Tell them to show some mercy to this innocent man.

By
We’re of lefty Yahoo reporter Kevin Sites. He’s openly anti-American and anti-Israel. His coverage of what happened to our men in Fallujah was an outrage. Plus, he dedicates his Yahoo reporting to Code Pinko
But like every broken clock, he accidentally stumbles onto the right thing, occasionally. Despite trying to defame Israel in a piece, he reported on alleged refugees whom they refuse to allow to become Lebanese citizens with full rights.
Today’s “Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone” piece is about Gulsoma, an Afghan girl, now eleven years old, who was forced to marry at age FOUR!!!!!!!

“They beat me with electric wires,” she says, “mostly on the legs. My father-in-law told his other children to do it that way so the injuries would be hidden. He said to them, ‘break her bones, but don’t hit her on the face.'”
There were even times when the family’s abuse of Gulsoma transcended the bounds of the most wanton, sadistic cruelty, as on the occasions when they used her as a human tabletop, forcing her to lie on her stomach then cutting their food on her bare back. . . .
“When he came to the shed he kept asking me, ‘Why don’t you die? I imprisoned you, I give you less food, but still you don’t die.'”
But it wasn’t for lack of trying. Gulsoma said when her father-in-law finally let her out of the shed, he bound her hands behind her back and beat her unconscious. She says he revived her by pouring a tea thermos filling with scalding water over her head and her back.
“It was so painful,” she says, dabbing her eyes with her scarf and sniffling for a moment. “I was crying and screaming the entire time.”
Five days later, she says, her father in law gave her a vicious beating when his daughter’s wristwatch went missing.
“He thought I stole it,” she says, “and he beat me all over my body with his stick. He broke my arm and my foot. He said if I didn’t find it by the next day, he would kill me.”

Gulsoma was also scalded on her head, where she is now partly bald. Read her story and ingest the full details about how she was repeatedly beaten by her husband and new “family.”
Religion of Peace?