…is an important fact concerning the 2nd world war.

If you watch this video he mentions that the left considered the 2nd world war the “last good war”

but he fails to mention that once Hitler made his pact with the Soviets suddenly the Seegers, Chaplains of the left became completely anti war…until of course he invaded the Soviets and then they became the most strident voices for going over there. As I wrote at the time of his death:

Pete Seeger song on involvement in WW 2 before the Nazi’s attacked the USSR:

Franklin D, listen to me,
You ain’t a-gonna send me ‘cross the sea.
You may say it’s for defense
That kinda talk ain’t got no sense.

Pete Seeger song after Hitler invaded the USSR

Now, Mr. President
You’re commander-in-chief of our armed forces
The ships and the planes and the tanks and the horses
I guess you know best just where I can fight …
So what I want is you to give me a gun
So we can hurry up and get the job done!

Coincidence I’m sure.

It’s why a Newspaper is Missouri home of the late Michael Brown feels fine with ditching Stacy Washington a Black Woman from their paper, Black live and opinions may matter but not if they are heretical to the church of the left.

Every time the left’s double standard on Nazi’s vs Communism comes up, this fact should be shouted loudly

,,,to prevent stuff like this from happening.

Choate, in Wallingford, Conn., is a blue-blooded school whose alumni include President John F. Kennedy and his brother Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. It is the latest in a string of prestigious private academies that have faced accusations of sexual abuse by faculty members, including St. George’s School, in Rhode Island, and Horace Mann and Poly Prep in New York City.

“They are closed systems, especially residential private schools where kids are separated from their parents,” said Paul Mones, a lawyer who represents victims of sexual abuse. “It’s not like a public school, with people coming in and out all the time. There are many more opportunities for teachers to do this.”

You mean this is systematic?   Well in that case the press must have been all over it eh?

Choate said it had been compelled to examine this ugly history in 2013, after two alumni alerted the school to sexual misconduct they had experienced as students, the report said. In 2016, The Boston Globe published an article that described abuse at the school, and shortly thereafter, Choate announced that it had appointed an investigator from the law firm Covington & Burling.

The Globe published only one article?  You mean to say they didn’t have a long series about continual abuse at these and other schools, deep questioning of the various authorities in charge of those elite schools?  That’s can’t be, obviously they would have pushed these stories onto a national stage to talk about the pattern of behavior at schools like these and demand authorities act on them.  They would have had repeated in-depth interviews with survivors and encouraged associations to be formed for people abused in the private elite school systems.  And even after the various schools took concrete steps and  revamped these system they would have persisted in shining a critical eye on them for decades.

For years, the school kept allegations of sexual misconduct from getting out, according to the report. “Sexual misconduct matters were handled internally and quietly,” it said. “Even when a teacher was terminated or resigned in the middle of the school year because he or she had engaged in sexual misconduct with a student, the rest of the faculty was told little and sometimes nothing about the teacher’s departure and, when told, was cautioned to say nothing about the situation if asked.”

And yet we are only seeing the odd article in the Times and the Globe, this simply can’t be.  I mean we’re talking Pulitzer prize stuff here.  Why don’t you know this topic has to be discussed to the point where every private school is suspect, particularly if people are paying fifty grand to go to places like this?  It’s got everything to sell a long series of stories, money, sex, coverups, the powerful taking advantage of the powerless, this should be a story that’s been on everyone’s radar for years.  Yet it’s almost as obscure as the rampant abuse by UN peace keepers around the world.

I can’t figure out why the MSM doesn’t consider this story bigger.  Why wasn’t Rolling Stone banging on the door and senators in Congress making speeches about it?  What’s the missing element that keeps this from being newsworthy enough for national coverage?

Anybody?

For me the most amazing thing about the Susan Rice story isn’t CNN using an Obama staffer as their go to guy on the story,  nor the media’s attempt to spin the story as nothing,  or President Obama playing with the “unmasking” rules to make it all possible, nor the her actions were laudable defense, the Washington Post’s tardy desire for an explanation, the possible involvement of the FBI in this farce, DeGenova’s revelations on “spreadsheets” , the fact that the White house doesn’t do investigations, CNN’s all out effort to first deny and then minimize the while thing,   or even Rice’s denials that the unmasking was improper , that is wasn’t political,

No the real revelation is best highlighted by this from Glenn Reynolds:

I TWEETED MAGGIE HABERMAN LAST NIGHT TO ASK IF IT WAS TRUE THAT SHE WAS SITTING ON THIS STORY, BUT SHE DIDN’T RESPOND

and this video via the American Thinker by Mike Cernovich

partially quoted by zero hedge:

“Maggie Haberman had it. She will not run any articles that are critical of the Obama administration.”

“Eli Lake had it. He didn’t want to run it and Bloomberg didn’t want to run it because it vindicates Trump’s claim that he had been spied upon. And Eli Lake is a ‘never Trumper.’ Bloomberg was a ‘never Trump’ publication.”

“I’m showing you the politics of ‘real journalism’. ‘Real journalism’ is that Bloomberg had it and the New York Times had it but they wouldn’t run it because they don’t want to run any stories that would make Obama look bad or that will vindicate Trump. They only want to run stories that make Trump look bad so that’s why they sat on it.”

What the revelation?  It’s apparently that the mainstream media, the media that once owned information and its decimation apparently learned nothing from the rise of Matt Drudge.

Twenty years ago Newsweek had the story of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. They choose to sit on it and it instead went to Matt Drudge. It made Matt Drudge rich lead to a situation where twenty years later while Newsweek which has been sold several times for the price of a Whopper Jr, despite decades of history and being one of the most recognized names in news in the top 5000 web sites in the world (4910) and top 1700 (1679) according to Alexa in the US vs the drudgereport.com’s at 723 in the world and 156 in the US.

Even worse it’s spawned 100’s of other sites (like this one) that promote stories the MSM would like to bury or fact check the stories the media promoted that were once accepted as gospel. So unless you are talking something like the Khalidi tape of which there is only a single copy held by the LA Times (unless they’ve destroyed it by now) it is very difficult to keep a story away from anyone who has a link to the internet.

One might think that the last twenty years might have taught the media this but apparently it has not. The media hasn’t figured out that just because the liberal narrative isn’t publicly challenged in the newsroom conservatives don’t exist there. And while said conservatives at the NYT, Bloomberg or elsewhere might be silent to remain gainfully employed it doesn’t prevent them from dropping an email to a person when they see something they don’t like. As Don Surber put it:

The media has lost its power, but doesn’t realize it.

Of course there is the possibility that there is a different revelation here, one revealed by this post at Mike Cernovich’s site

Breaking his usual rule of never appearing on edited television, author and filmmaker Mike Cernovich went on 60 Minutes to show a record 15 million people the power of real news. The result was 60 Minutes’ highest rated episode in almost a decade.

60 Minutes’ tops ratings for first time since 2008

 

NEW YORK (AP) — CBS’ “60 Minutes” returned this week to a familiar place it hadn’t been accustomed to visiting that much lately: first place in the prime-time television rankings.

 

The venerable newsmagazine hadn’t finished as the most-watched program of the week since November 2008, when newly elected Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, sat down for the first TV interview since their election.

Cernovich’s appearance on 60 Minutes was a matter of great interest, with his many haters around the world expecting him to look bad in front of a record 15 million viewers.

Perhaps a lot of his enemies were watching to boost the numbers but in my mind it’s much more likely that instead of the normal niche market liberals that 60 minutes normally draws from, they instead were able to draw from the entire news consuming public, a public that might have been shocked to see a Network news anchor admit that they believed the word of the Clinton campaign without question.

If that’s the case why would a for profit organization, mired in a situation where their audience is diluted by a plethora of alternative choices , when showed the potential profit of drawing a whole new customer base choose to leave this source of revenue behind?  After all if goal as a news organization is to attract the maximum amount of viewers to generate the greatest possible profit by presenting credible news to the largest audience possible then such a choice is foolhardy and a sign that they have not learned a thing.

BUT if you goal is to advance a narrative favorable to a liberal niche of high power high power donors while be invited to the right parties etc, then it makes perfect sense as Stacy McCain and I explained six years ago…

Furthermore, consider how rich liberals are willing to act as “angels” toward their media pets. I made this point yesterday in regard to Tina Brown, who lost $80 million during two years as editor of Talk, after losing $40 million during a three-year period as editor of The New Yorker, and who has most recently pushed back the goalposts of projected profitability at the Daily Beast to somewhere between (a) three years and (b) when hell freezes over.

Does it not occur to you, my clever readers, that these are not merely business losses, but are in fact a sort of charitable endeavor to support the propagation of fashionable liberalism?

As our friend Da Tech Guy points out, “profit is not the goal of those who invest with Tina Brown”:

She is part of a club, an elite . . . 
[W]hen people invest in Tina Brown, their return is to be part of that “In” crowd. To be invited to the party, to be able to say to people: “Oh yes I was at that event with Tina, we met Bernard Henri-Levy and we had a marvelous time.”
It’s all about being a member, Invest in Tina Brown and you can hobnob with the great.

Yes, but what Pete overlooks is this: Being a magazine editor gave Brown enormous influence in deciding who belongs to the “in” crowd. And one hand washes the other: Does Mika Brzezinski crave favorable coverage from the Daily Beast? “Oh, let’s invite Tina Brown onto Morning Joe!”

if that the goal than do don’t care if you eschew the profits from a larger potential  audience in fact any smaller profit from liberal viewers or readers who choose to stick with you because you are unwilling to challenge their worldview is a bonus extra.


If you think it’s worthwhile to report stories that the MSM won’t and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

The big story on the rightside of the blogosphere has been the Susan Rice revelations reported both at Fox:

Multiple sources tell Fox News that Susan Rice, former national security adviser under then-President Barack Obama, requested to unmask the names of Trump transition officials caught up in surveillance.

and at Bloomberg:

White House lawyers last month learned that the former national security adviser Susan Rice requested the identities of U.S. persons in raw intelligence reports on dozens of occasions that connect to the Donald Trump transition and campaign, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.
The pattern of Rice’s requests was discovered in a National Security Council review of the government’s policy on “unmasking” the identities of individuals in the U.S. who are not targets of electronic eavesdropping, but whose communications are collected incidentally. Normally those names are redacted from summaries of monitored conversations and appear in reports as something like “U.S. Person One.”

And MSNBC’s objections not withstanding even more is coming up 

Computer logs that former President Obama’s team left behind in the White House indicate his national security adviser Susan Rice accessed numerous intelligence reports during Obama’s last seven months in office that contained National Security Agency intercepts involving Donald Trump and his associates, Circa has learned.

Intelligence sources said the logs discovered by National Security Council staff suggested Rice’s interest in the NSA materials, some of which included unmasked Americans’ identities, appeared to begin last July around the time Trump secured the GOP nomination and accelerated after Trump’s election in November launched a transition that continued through January.

Powerline writes about it:

If true, this is a bombshell, if not exactly a surprise. We know from her tour of the Sunday morning talk shows to misrepresent Benghazi that Rice was a political hack, more than willing to do dirty work on behalf of President Obama. Her alleged role here would fit with that history.

Don Surber:

There is no evidence of any wrongdoing by President Trump. But plenty of evidence points to Barack Obama’s abuse of power. Let us follow that trail.

Glenn Reynolds:

It is a felony to conspire to “injure, threaten, or intimidate a person in any state, territory or district in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him/her by the Constitution or the laws of the Unites States.”

Related: Susan Rice unmasked? Previously said “I know nothing about” Nunes allegations.

PJ Media:

So, let’s review:

  • authorized under the Obama Administration √
  • pretty high up √
  • confidante of friends in high places √√√√

Susan Rice certainly seems to fit. Of course, the remaining question is who did the actual leaking.

And despite CNN and the left considering it a “distraction” and then claiming it is false,  it is a significant development but the real sign that there is some there there comes not so much from these stories, but from this piece by Byron York:

So with Schiff’s visit to the White House, a chance for balance. But after viewing the documents, Schiff has gone nearly completely silent about what he saw. He has kept up his criticism of how Nunes came to view the material, but on what’s actually in the documents, Schiff has said virtually nothing.

That seems rather odd, for quite a while we couldn’t turn on cable news without seeing Congressman Schiff not only making claims about Donald Trump and Russia but hitting the chairman of his committee for talk, but now with Jake Tapper he suddenly came back with this:

Schiff made no public comments on Saturday, and then on Sunday morning appeared on CNN, where Jake Tapper asked Schiff if, having seen the documents, “can you understand why Chairman Nunes might have some issues with the surveillance that was going on?”

“I can’t go into the contents of the documents, Jake,” Schiff said, before a quick pivot to Nunes’ methods. “I can say I don’t agree with the chairman’s characterization, which is exactly why it’s so important you don’t share documents with just one person or even two people. They need to be shared with both full committees.”

Continuing, Schiff said “the most important thing” about the documents is not what is in them but how they were handled

The unwillingness of congressman Schiff to talk about what he saw speaks even louder than the rest of the headlines, it suggests that Kurt Schlichter prediction is coming true

This is all going to blow up in the Democrats’ faces, and when it does I’m going to laugh and raise my vodka glass in a joyous toast to their latest and greatest failure.

The question is this:  When it happens will the media report it?


If you think it’s worthwhile to report stories that the MSM won’t and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

Col Klink:   No it’s not possible, General Mulendorf
Gestapo Captain Borman: With his arm around your shoulders.  
Col Klink: Yes we were friends
Gestapo Captain Borman: Close Friends, and very possibly associated in za plot to assassinate the Führer
Col Klink: I hardly knew the man, went to school together ten years, saw each other every day but what’s that?
Gestapo Captain Borman: You were also best man at his wedding
Col Klink:  Oh, Well I had nothing else to do that afternoon.

Hogan’s Heroes: The Big Picture 1970

In yesterday’s post on the Montreal Anti-Semitic Imam story I pointed out that the press in their writing seemed to miss that the outrage of the Muslim Community to invited guest Jordanian cleric Sheikh Muhammad bin Musa Al Nasr didn’t materialize until after the rest of the world saw the translation of his words in English months after he was invited, spoke and the words put online in arabic. Today’s piece touches on a more subtle but even more telling bit from the story is this quote from Imam Ziad Asali of the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects, presumably someone who knows a thing or two about his religion on the verse sited by the Jordanian Sheikh as reported by the CBC.

The hadith is one of more than 100,000 that are written in many books, some of which are considered authentic, while others are not, said Asali.

Now if your goal is to minimize the role of Islam as understood by Muslims you would do what the CBC did and move directly on, but if you were a reporter interesting is finding the truth, then Imam’s Asali’s quote leads to a rather obvious question:

Is the Hadith and the quote within it considered “Authentic” by Muslims?

Well to answer the question one would need to know what a Hadith is, which one this is and where it came from.

The encyclopedia Britannica defines a Hadith as:

Hadith, Arabic Ḥadīth (“News” or “Story”), also spelled Hadīt , record of the traditions or sayings of the Prophet Muhammad, revered and received as a major source of religious law and moral guidance, second only to the authority of the Qurʾān, the holy book of Islam. It might be defined as the biography of Muhammad perpetuated by the long memory of his community for their exemplification and obedience. The development of Hadith is a vital element during the first three centuries of Islamic history, and its study provides a broad index to the mind and ethos of Islam.

 

Hmmmm it would seem to me then that being a “major source of religious law and moral guidance” and “second only to the authority of the Qurʾān,” a Hadith is not something to be taken lightly and dismissed in the cavalier fashion. One would think Imam Asali would know this.

But even if this is true about Hadith’s in general, the question still remains, is this Hadith a valid one?

The Hadith in question is titled: The Book of Miscellaneous ahadith of Significant Values which in addition to the offending quote has gems such as:

وعنه رضي الله عنه أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال‏:‏ ‏ “‏يتبع الدجال من يهود أصبهان سبعون ألفا عليهم الطيالسة‏”‏ ‏(‏‏(‏رواه مسلم‏)‏‏)‏‏.‏

or in English

The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said, “Dajjal (the Antichrist) will be followed by seventy thousand Jews of Isfahan and will be dressed in robes of green coloured satin.”

So the question now on the floor would be: Is The Book of Miscellaneous ahadith of Significant Values an authentic book from a credible source?

Well a quick net search answers that question. It comes from a fellow by the name of Imam Al Nawawi. Here is some background:

Al-Imām Muhy al-Dīn Abū Zakariyyā Yahyā ibn Sharaf al-Nawawī, born in the village of Nawa on the Horan Plain of southern Syria in 631 H. He was the imām of the later Shāfiʿī School, the scholar of his time in knowledge, piety, and abstinence, a hadīth master (hāfiẓ), biographer, lexicologist, and Sufi.

So this is a guy who was an early Islamic scholar but we need more than that.  What kind of guy is he, is he a well known scholar credible scholar of Islam?:

His Character

The scholars, elite of his society, and the public greatly respected Imam Nawawi on account of his piety, learning, and excellent character. He dressed and ate simply and humbly. Devout scholars do not care about attaining worldly possessions, they give preference to religious and academic pursuits, and the dissemination and propagation of faith. They experience more heavenly delight and joy in such activities than those who seek satisfaction in luxurious life styles. He was God-fearing who had high ambitions and aims in the dissemination and propagation of faith.

His Works and Death

Imam Nawawi had a very short life (44 years) but even during this short period, he wrote a large number of books on various subjects. Nearly every work is a masterpiece and a treasure of knowledge. Hundreds of thousands of people have benefited from these works.

Some of the prestigious works of Imam Nawawi, apart from the compilation of the “40 Hadith” (al-Arbaʿīn) include:

Riyāḍ al-Ṣāliḥīn
Commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī
Commentary on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (Al-Minhāj fi Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim)
Sharḥ Sunan Abī Dāwūd
Mukhtaṣar Al-Tirmidhī
Kitāb al-Rawḍah
Kitāb al-Adhkār
Al-Taqrīb fī ʿIlm al-Ḥadīth wa al-Irshād fīhi
Al-Tibyān
Bustān al-ʿĀrifīn
After spending 28 years in scholarly pursuits away from home, Imam Nawawi returned to his hometown. Soon after his arrival in Nawā, he fell ill and died. His works are of everlasting value. May Allah bless him.

Emphasis mine.  That seems like a guy whose work is credible, but are they still sought after today?  Here is Kitaabun.com a site that sells Islamic books and items offering his works

The famous 5th Century Hijri, Ahadith compilation by Imam Al-Nawawi, The ahadith are predominantly from Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim (Other ahadith are from the reliable Books such as Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah and Muwatta Imam Malik),
Considered by Many as the Most Important Book after the Qur’an Simply because it is a Summary of authentic Traditions of the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W).

1900 Ahadith compiled over 372 Chapters and 19 Sections which can be generalised as follows:
The Book of Good Manners – The Book about the Etiquette of Eating – The Book of Dress -The Book of the Etiquette of Sleeping, Lying and Sitting, etc.- The book of Greetings – The Book of Visiting the Sick – The Book of Etiquette of Traveling – The Book of Virtues – The Book of I’tikaf – The Book of Hajj – The Book of Jihad – The Book of Knowledge – The Book of Praise and Gratitude to Allah – The Book of Supplicating Allah to Exalt the Mention of Allah’s Messenger (phuh) – The Book of the Remembrance of Allah – The Book of Du’a (Supplications) – The Book of the Prohibited Actions – The Book of Miscellaneous Ahadith of Significant values – The Book of Forgiveness

About Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277)

Imam Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi was Born in the village of Nawa in Southern Syria, Imam Nawawi spent most of his life in Damascus where he lived in a simple manner, devoted to Allah, engaging single-mindedly in worship, study, writing and teaching various Islamic sciences. .
Although best known for his works in hadith, Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277) was also the Imam of the later Shafi’i school of Jurisprudence, and widely acknowledged as the intellectual heir to Imam Shafi’i. He was a renowned scholar and jurist who dedicated his life to the pursuit of Islamic learning.

emphasis mine. You can see a screen shot here it case it mysteriously disappears tomorrow, but if so you can always go to Amazon.com and find not only his books

but scholarly commentaries on them

Now I don’t claim to be an Islamic scholar, but all this tells me that Imam Al Nawawi is a significant scholar in the History of Islam and that his Hadiths are considered authentic.

So lets get back to his original statement about the Hadith in question from Imam Ziad Asali of the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects

The hadith is one of more than 100,000 that are written in many books, some of which are considered authentic, while others are not, said Asali.

The statement is factually true, this is one of more that 100,000 Hadith, there are many books of them and some of those books are considered authentic and some are not.

However the Books of Miscellaneous Ahadith of Significant values isn’t just one of many books. It’s a historically significant book written by reputable and respected early scholar of Islam that is without a doubt considered authentic by Muslims to this day.

Now it’s of course theoretically  possible that all of these facts that I was able to discover in an hour or two on the net about Imam Al Nawawi and his place in Islamic Scholarship, and the Hadith The Book of Miscellaneous Ahadith of Significant Values are completely unknown to Imam Ziad Asali of the Association of Islamic Charitable Projects, but I suspect not. I suspect instead that he rightly assumed that the CBC had no interest in clarifying this question, and he was right.

Alas for Iman Asali, I don’t work for the CBC.


If you think this and all we do is worthwhile and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

To those who like to argue that Islam is a religion of piece and those who wish to support terror and or kill Jews simply because they are Jews, this story out of Canada reported by CBC news:

Imam calling for Jews to be killed in sermon at Montreal mosque draws police complaint

Larger Muslim community wants apology from mosque and wonders why controversial imam was invited to preach

and at the Daily Mail

Outrage as Jordanian imam ‘recites anti-Semitic religious verse calling for Jewish people to be killed’ during sermon at Montreal mosque

  • A Jewish advocacy group filed a complaint Monday in Montreal, Canada
  • Spoke out against a sermon given by Sheikh Muhammad bin Musa Al Nasr
  • Jordanian cleric is believed to have been invited as a guest to the mosque
  • Quoted a verse that says: ‘O Muslim, O servant of Allah, O Muslim, O servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him’
  • The larger Muslim community has condemned the use of the verse and urged the mosque to apologize 

But in the rush to congratulate the larger Canadian Muslim community on demonstrating their outrage and tolerance themselves on showing how tolerant the media reporting this story are missing two important points. Today let’s deal with the first one:

Where was the outrage of Muslims WHEN IT HAPPENED?

The CBC story states

The sermon took place at the Dar Al-Arqam Mosque in the city’s Saint-Michel neighbourhood on Dec. 23, 2016.

That means this imam spoke three months ago to a crowd of listeners at a Mosque in Canada. If you look at the listeners in the video, did you see people objecting? Did you see people complaining, did you see anyone raising a hand in dissent or even looking uncomfortable? Did any of them run to the Newspapers or even send them a letter saying how outraged they were over the event?

Nope.

Furthermore note what follows

The video was posted to the mosque’s YouTube channel three days later.

So since December 26th this video has been out there in plain sight (at least until this report, I wasn’t able to find it myself) and for some reason neither the folks at the Mosque nor any other Canadian Muslim who happened to watch the video during that time was all that outraged, Nor did any of the Muslims who viewed it, even if they might have agreed with it, think to say to the folks at the Mosque in question: “You know you might want to take that down as it doesn’t reflect well on us.”

Why, I submit and suggest because Canada’s Muslim community didn’t have a problem with it until it became known to non-Muslims and was plastered all over the web so every non-Muslim out there could see Islam preached as it is, by an Imam who knows his faith to an audience of believers completely unfazed by what they are hearing.

That’s when suddenly Muslims in Canada not only made it a point to condemn it to the press, but according to the Daily Mail calling themselves victims:

Another imam, Ziad Asali, firmly condemned the use of the verse.
‘I do not understand how this person was invited to come and give a sermon and spread this hatred in Montreal against any community,’ he told CBC.
‘To use the themes of the Prophet to spread hatred is actually something that is disrespectful towards the Prophet himself.’
Asali also spoke out against any mosque spreading extremist messages.
‘These people, not only do they show hatred towards non-Muslims, they even show hatred to us Muslims,’ he added

Yup, nothing shows hatred to Muslims like the quoting a Hadith of Islam by an Imam of Islam to a group of Muslims.

That the CBC didn’t find this nasty bit of weaseling, worth questioning says something, both about Muslims in Canada and the press that enables them, but there is something worse, but that comes tomorrow.

Closing thought: Canada has no first amendment and considers such speech unlawful so while I consider such laws unjust they had better damn well apply them equally to those who profess Islam as to those who profess Christianity in its many forms.

But if it was up to me as a big first amendment guy if this Imam wants to quote stuff like this and people want to hear him I say it let him because of the principles of freedom of speech and freedom of religion demand it. And By the same token people like me must be free to not only expose him these words, but be free to publicly critique and rebuke him, all those who follow him for expressing such things free to condemn his religion as false and wrong. He has the right to offend, we have the right to express our offense and offend him right back.

The easiest way to find who you are enslaved to is to discover who you are not allowed to offend by penalty of law.
******************

If you like the idea of the new media asking the questions people like the CBC won’t and would like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in your funds we’ll always accept your prayers.

During all that time the theory had been failed to be proven wrong so it could have temporarily have been taken as right but it can never be proven right because tomorrow’s experiment may succeed in proving what you thought was right wrong, so we can never be proved right we can only be sure we’re wrong.

Richard Feynman 1964

Back in my youth one of the more interesting comics that Marvel put out was titled “What If” which provided alternate stories outside of the established Marvel timeline by changing one component of a story (What if Spider-Man joined the Fantastic Four, What if Conan walked the earth today, what if Conan was stranded in the 20th century which was an alternate ending the previous what if alternative event etc…) and postulating a different ending.

When dealing with the MSM however the game is different because rather than postulating on imaginary events we can play with real ones, for example.

What if this video instead of showing Democrats for months stating as fact, that Donald Trump paid no income taxes

Consisted of Republicans making a factual claim about Barack Obama that was conclusively proved false?

Given what we’ve seen in the past our media and press would be not only confronting every single member of the GOP that made this claim, not only asking them why they should be trusted in the present, but further asking other members of the GOP to denounce them.

Or let’s play What IF this tweet from rapper Bow Wow:

“Ayo @realDonaldTrump shut your punk a– up talking s–t about my uncle @SnoopDogg before we pimp your wife and make her work for us.”

and this tweet from the NYT making light of it

Had been about Michelle Obama?

Well as Hollywood in toto tells us we already saw how when a rodeo clown made fun of Barack Obama CNN considered it national news pols were made to condemn him and he was banned for life from the circuit. I suspect that if Mr. Bow Wow was a country singer whose primary audience consisted of Obama opponents pressure would be put on the GOP to condemn him in public, venues would be protested that had him and the journalist who made light of it would not have the public editor of the “paper of record” condemning such a reporter and demanding his resignation for being a misogynist rather than claiming:

After talking to the writer and the Culture editor, Danielle Mattoon, I came away convinced that Deb’s intentions were innocent, that he was not trying to align himself with the off-color sentiments of a rapper, but merely trying to pull off a pun.

The problem is, not everyone is “in” on the joke. Conservatives may use such tweets — or retweets — to further their case that the “liberal media” will do and say anything. More significantly, mainstream readers who hear of or see the tweet out of context might easily take offense. It’s a lose, lose.

…that the main problem with the tweet would be it would be misunderstood or used by their ideological enemies against them.

So in the tradition of Richard Feynman explanation on the scientific method starting with a guess and measuring it against the evidence

I propose the following theory:

The level of Outrage or interest of the media and their allies of on the left concerning any insult or prevarication concerning person or thing will routinely be equal to the inverse of the degree of the political distance between said media / leftists and and the target of said insult or prevarication at the time it is made.

Now in fairness we have years of evidence to support this theory at this time but our media friends can at any time provide evidence that this theory is wrong by simply being consistent in their outrage based not on the source or target, but on what is actually said and done.

They just choose not to.


There isn’t as much money in just reporting and telling the truth as we see it. But if you’d like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in we will always happily accept your prayers

Roger Cobb: Terry? I guess it wasn’t meant to be between us. I’ll always regret that. But I want you to know that, wherever it is you’re going, I hope you’ll be very happy.
Terry Hoskins:: I will. I’ve got a wonderful house, beautiful horses and all the money in the world why shouldn’t I be happy?
Roger Cobb: What?
Terry Hoskins:: If you think I’m really going through with this you’re not just stupid, you’re crazy.
Edwina Cutwatter {in Roger’s Body} What?
Roger Cobb: I’ll handle this. What?
Terry Hoskins::From the beginning I thought if mad Edwina wants to give her money away, she may as well give it to me. I never thought that “Flying Nun” could do it.

All of Me 1984

One thing about the Trump Tax story that’s actually more interesting than the left going from:

 Trump is keeping his tax returns from the Public because it will hurt him

to

Trump tricked us into releasing his tax return to the public because it will help him

Is  this question being asked by Allahpundit:’

Maddow’s fans idolize her as a smart liberal with a supposedly foolproof bullsh*t detector — yet here she was last night not only bullsh*tting them at length about the news value of the returns but quite possibly doing so as an unwitting pawn in a limited hangout by the Trump White House. She got suckered by someone, maybe the Republican president himself, which is something that should never, ever happen to MSNBC’s liberal eggheads. It’s sufficiently bad for her brand that it’s hard to imagine how she could have rationalized one night of mega-ratings as being worth the letdown and loss of faith in her judgment that she’d suffer among her regular fans. So I ask again: Why the ridiculous hype? I can’t figure it out.

which is even more cogent given this excellent point

by the time she finally got into the details of the 1040, it was Geraldo and the Al Capone vault all over again. Which brings us back to the question: Why? Why make viewers wait with bated breath for something you know can only disappoint them?

John Ziegler’s explanation is that hype is usually inversely proportional to actual news value. That is, it’s because Maddow knew she had nothing that she had to draw out the suspense. If there was anything truly juicy in the return, he reasons, don’t you think it would have been revealed by NBC’s hard news division, most likely Lester Holt’s program, instead of by Maddow during the 9 p.m. hour of liberal power?

So the questions on the floor are:

Why did Maddow push this?

Why are MSNBC and the rest of the press are still pushing it‘?

The Answer is as Stacy McCain alludes to is:  this is what the liberal rubes want.

After finally “reporting” the numbers, Maddow then filled the extra time with a lot of blabber — wild speculation about what sinister secrets might be hidden behind those opaque numbers. She suggested there could be debts owed to shady foreign entities (Russians, nudge, nudge, wink, wink) who could thereby influence Trump’s policies. While it is of course possible that such things could be true, speculation is not news, or else I could win a Pulitzer Prize for my seven-part series speculating that Rachel Maddow could be having a secret affair with Mika Brzezinski. Because, hey, why not?

The circular logic of Maddow’s “investigative journalism”:

  1. Donald Trump is a Republican;
  2. Republicans are evil;
    therefore
  3. Somewhere, there must be evidence of how evil Trump is.

Really, that’s all she’s got — a belief in Trump’s evil, which permits her (and every other liberal journalist) to constantly locate mountainous “scandals” where anyone with common sense sees only a molehill. Ever since Hillary lost the election, the media have been dogpiling every possible variation on the Russians-hacked-the-election conspiracy theory, because that’s what their core audience of disappointed Democrat voters want to believe. [emphasis mine]

Remember we’ve seen this before, when the Target was Michelle Bachmann

For many months we’re heard about Bachmann “scandals” that have been ready to break .

With a left dying to beat her and a media scoffing at and hating her it would be only a matter of time before the chickens would come home to roost.

Bull.

You have an IRS that was leaking tax information to the left, you have an AG going after Fox news reporters and their families, you had a press united in their disdain for the congresswoman and you think if there was some there there we would not have seen some actual meat out there?

And of course there was Fitzmas, when the entire left was convinced that prosecutor was just a step away from indicting Karl Rove, who would lead to Dick Cheney and maybe even George W. Bush.  Do you remember the anticipation, the jokes on late night and all that?  Stacy McCain did

For the love of God, have we forgotten “Fitzmas,” the 2005 rumor that special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s federal grand jury was about to indict Rove or Cheney or both? Who could ever forget the ridiculous farce of “investigative journalist” Scott Leopold “reporting” in May 2006 that Rove had been indicted?

And most importantly how it ended for them

05.10.25.BlueFitzmas-X

Stacy again

All of that ridiculous “PlameGate” nonsense was taken very seriously by the mainstream media, as though it were a real scandal that might implicate the president in High Crimes and Misdemeanors, and yet it was transparently absurd from start to finish.

That sounds really familiar doesn’t it, Trump Russia, Trump and Taxes, Trump and Bannon, etc etc etc the MSM keeps pushing this stuff, not because they believe it but because they know their customer base on the left does and will keep believing, and even if They’re burned

They just keep grabbing the next one.

You see liberalism is a religion and Their primary belief is that Conservatives/Republicans are the focus of evil in the world and we’re only one leak or investigation away from them being exposed forever.

That’s why this 2nd tweet from Ali is evergreen

Just substitute Bush, or Cheney, or Rove, or Palin, or Bachmann, and that tweet would be true in the past. We can put Conway or Bannon instead or (or along with) Trump and that sentence still works. And someday and someday in the future those names will be replaced by Republicans we’ve never heard of.

But the Democrats will still be the same and the MSM and the professional left will be there to play them, just as Ironically Buzzfeed reports that even Brett Kimberlin is back to play the rubes. Yeah Kimberlin is a bomber, a con man, a violent mendacious serial litigator but he’s not so stupid as not to recognize an easy mark when he sees them.

This is religion for the left and they’ll keep believing no matter what reality says to the contrary and if it doesn’t pan out they’ll wipe away their memory of their last failure just like Wikipedia wiped away Fitzmas removing its entry & redirecting it down the memory hole and grasp the next “scandal”.

I’ll give the last word to Peter Cook and Rowan Atkinson who demonstrate here

that Monty Python isn’t the only British comedy that the left has mistakenly decided was actually a guide to life.


Alas there isn’t as much money in just reporting and telling the truth as we see it. But if you’d like to help us pay our writers and make our annual goal Consider subscribing and become (if you wish) a listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



And of course if you want to give a one shot hit (and help pay DaWife’s medical bills) you can hit DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

If you are not in the position to kick in dollars we will always happily accept your prayers.

The worst part of the Trump tax story is what it doesn’t to the favorite meme of the left.

We are constantly told that the rich need to pay “Their fair share” in taxes and Democrats constantly use that line to justify all kinds of tax increases that affect the rich and middle class alike.

With that 35 Million figure it’s going to be pretty hard for the left to argue that President Trump doesn’t pay his fair share particularly since that figure doesn’t count state taxes, local taxes, payroll taxes, property taxes, excise taxes, sales taxes, personal property taxes and any of the assorted fees that he might be required to pay.

So the question on the table for Rachel Maddow and the left:

How much of someone else’s money do you have to take from someone before they’ve paid “their fair share”?

Take your time.

Exit questions:

  1. If the left considers it legit to leak Trump’s taxes illegally does that mean it’s open season on anyone they consider the enemy?

  2. Will reporters start complaining when their tax returns start leaking?

Over the last few weeks the leftist media have elevated several Democrat successes in retaining seats in blue state races that they were already favored to win as a sign that the Trump era is already in retreat.

Oddly enough I haven’t seen them promote a result that, for my money, is not only the biggest election story since November, it is  fact one of the biggest stories of a week full of big stories.

It comes from Rutland Vermont where incumbent mayor of 10 years Chris Louras was beaten in a 4 person race by a city counselor  in his latest attempt at re-election as Vermont Public Radio reports:

In Rutland, the third time was a charm for challenger David Allaire, who unseated longtime mayor Christopher Louras in a surprise upset.

Allaire, a 19-year veteran of the Rutland City Board of Aldermen, won 52 percent of the votes in a four-way race against Louras and challengers Mike Coppinger and Kam Johnston.

Louras, who had held the job since 2007, won 34 percent of the votes; Coppinger won 13 percent and Johnston 1 percent.

Now you might be thinking: sure it’s a tad unusual for an incumbent to lose like that and for a challenger to take over 50% in a 4 person race but even so why is a mayors race in the land of Bernie Sanders is that worthy of a post here? Well it turns out last April the sitting mayor introduced a plan that might sound a tad familiar to those who follow national politicts:

Officials in Rutland say the city will take in 100 Syrian refugees beginning in October. Rutland Mayor Christopher Louras said he’s been working closely with state and federal refugee agencies to create Vermont’s first relocation community for Syrians.

The refugee announcement was made at a packed City Hall press conference Tuesday.

It’s worth noting that the April Story from Vermont Public Radio seemed to lionize the decision here’s a screen shot from the online piece

Look how they bold the mayor’s dramatic words. See how important this move is (I thought the “cultural enrichment” line was interested so I highlighted that myself)

Well in fact it was SO important that he didn’t bother to consult either the people or the aldermen

Last week, Rutland Mayor Chris Louras announced about 100 refugees would be arriving in the city starting in October. The announcement came as a surprise to local lawmakers and residents, who up until that point had not been told anything about the plan.

And it turns out that liberal as Vt in General and Rutland in particular is, that didn’t sit all too well:

Critics of a plan to bring 100 Syrian refugees to Rutland lambasted city officials and resettlement experts during a heated Board of Aldermen meeting on Wednesday night.

Many aldermen complained that they were shut out of deliberations on the plan, which was hatched by Mayor Chris Louras and the nonprofit Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program.

“I have a big concern about how this has played out … behind the backs of the city of Rutland,” Alderman David Allaire said before a standing-room-only crowd of more than 100 people in the Godnick Adult Center. “How can you come to our city and decide for our citizens what information is to be released and when? How can you ever regain the trust of the citizens of Rutland?”

Well it’s actually pretty easy to decide for the citizens if you make sure they get no say:

Voters in Rutland will not get the chance to weigh in on whether to bring in 100 Syrian refugees. A 6-4 vote by members of the Rutland City Board of Aldermen fell one short of the seven needed to put it on the ballot.

Nearly 100 people attended Tuesday night’s Board of Aldermen meeting to weigh in on that issue.

Several board members expressed frustration that Mayor Christopher Louras had orchestrated the refugee resettlement effort without their input. They complained the secrecy and lack of information early on had put them in a difficult position and created unease among many local residents.

Aldermen Matt Bloomer says he felt torn. On the one hand, he supported bringing refugees to Rutland and he voted against putting the issue on the ballot.

“But I also felt like it would be difficult to ignore the petition and just throw it in the trash and say, ‘We disagree with the public vote,’ and we’re not going to do anything to address the concerns of what I feel is a fairly decent size part of the community,” Bloomer says.

Apparently it wasn’t difficult enough for the Alderman to allow the public to vote on the issue.

So with the quashing of a public vote in July the program proceeded, by September the Obama Administration approved the plan, even Trump’s election wasn’t going to derail it:

Rutland Mayor Chris Louras has risked his political career on a controversial proposal to welcome 100 Syrian refugees to his long-struggling city, and spent most of the past year beating back fierce opposition and nativist rhetoric from his critics.

Despite president-elect Donald Trump’s victory after a campaign in which he vowed to bar Muslim immigrants from entering America, Louras said he and his allies are proceeding apace.

I love the pejorative in that first paragraph don’t you?

True to his word the plan proceeded and so in the final week of the Obama Administration the first refugees arrived in Rutland.

A family of Syrian refugees arrived in Rutland on Wednesday, according to the U.S. Committee for Refugees and Immigrants. Another family is expected to make it to the city on Thursday evening, said Stacie Blake, the USCRI’s director of government and community relations.

And while President Trump’s 1st executive order was a danger to the plan, once it was overturned the only thing standing in the way of the full contingent of refugees arriving was the Mayoral election in March which given the liberalism of Vermont and the support of the press was likely a foregone conclusion particularly with the opposition divided into three parts and all of his opponents not daring to oppose resettlement but objecting to the lack of transparency. In the final debate he bluntly stated that the world would judge Rutland on this vote:

Louras, who’s been mayor since 2007, stands by his actions and says Rutland will be defined by its attitude toward refugees and by the results of next week’s election.

“I have absolutely no regrets with respect to bringing refugees to Rutland,” said Louras after Wednesday night’s forum. “And the fact is, I would challenge anyone in this community to look into the eyes of the children, as I have, and challenge them to say, if I had my way, you wouldn’t be here right now.”

The 56-year-old says resettling refugees creates economic benefits and brings more youth and diversity to a city that he says needs both. 

And who could be against “economic benefits”m “youth and diversity”  certainly nobody in Vermont the land of Bernie Sanders.

Nobody, except the voters:

In unofficial voting results, David Allaire, a city alderman and leading critic of the resettlement, trounced Louras, a 10-year mayoral incumbent, by a 776-vote margin, according to results cited by the Rutland Herald and WCAX-TV.

How could this be? After all his success in bringing Syrian refugees to Rutland was “legacy defining victory” according to the press. How could he have lost?

Rutland Mayor Chris Louras didn’t utter the word “refugee” during his reelection kickoff speech, and tried desperately to make the campaign about more than just the resettlement debate that roiled his city for the past year.

But Wednesday, as he processed his lopsided defeat to Alderman Dave Allaire, the chief opponent of his plan to bring 100 Syrian and Iraqi refugees to the city, Louras said he had been wrong on two key points:

One, the refugee issue was the only one that mattered to voters. And two, he was apparently mistaken in his oft-stated belief that the refugees’ supporters outnumbered their opponents in the community.

“In spite of the fact that we tried to make this campaign about issues and about facts, the reality is that it was in fact a referendum on resettlement,” Louras told Seven Days. “They voted on emotion. Rutland is a microcosm of the national dialogue around immigrants and refugees [and] I believe that was  the major contributing factor to this campaign and to the voters’ decision.”

Now I’m not from Vermont nor Rutland but If I had to guess I’d say the major factor in the decision was a bunch of people who decided they not only knew best but that anyone who thought otherwise was some kind of bigot or racist and suggested it to their faces.   This comment from the final story really says it all.

Mayor Louras,

You need to stop blaming your loss on the refugee situation you created..

You clearly lost because you are a deceitful person and have no problem lying to the public.

I think it is sad that you cannot accept that and you still want to cast a dark cloud on the hard-working honest people of Rutland Vermont and the surrounding area.

When I attended the mayoral debate I heard you make the statement that everyone is watching to see the results of the mayoral election.

It seemed as though you threatened everyone that if you weren’t elected the people of Rutland Vermont would look like they were against the refugees.

The people in this community should have been allowed to have some input in this major decision but YOU decided to leave them out.

You losing this election is only the result of you being deceitful and ignoring the voters of Rutland, VT.

Posted by Richard Ley on 03/08/2017 at 9:25 PM

I invite you dear readers to take a look at this series of stories and ask yourself Was this not the National Election in miniature played out in the most liberal of states?  A long time pol with the press solidly behind him arrogantly pushing a radical agenda and suggesting till the very last moment that a vote against him would define the electorate as bigots?

Now I’m sure former Mayor Louras will do fine.   Both of VT’s Senators are very old and I suspect the left might be very happy to turn you into a heroic martyr to the cause of resisting Donald Trump and you’ll do very well running again the “rabble” (the word used to describe those who voted against you in comments) who voted you out in seeking national office.

But if I’m the Democrat party, and I’ve just spent the last two months excoriating Donald Trump over his refugee/immigration policies all over the media and I can’t win an election that was admittedly a referendum on taking in refugees in VERMONT, I’d be pretty scared right now.

Perhaps that’s why the MSM which found former mayor Louras’ refugee plan newsworthy in January for their paper of record

 

They hustled into the church on a biting winter evening, unburdened themselves of scarves and gloves, and settled into pews to sound out words in Arabic.

“Ahlan fii Rutland,” said Fran Knapp, a retiree who lives about 20 minutes away, one of two or three dozen people who have attended a class here on rudimentary Arabic.

Welcome to Rutland.

It was one of many preparations this remote city in central Vermont is making before 100 refugees from Syria and Iraq arrive here over the next year, with the first expected to come later this month.

The plan’s fiercest advocate has been the mayor of Rutland, Christopher Louras, who has cited not the moral argument for resettling refugees, but an economic one:

 

has apparently decided this local election story in the 3rd largest city in Vt wasn’t worth bringing national attention to and left it to places like Breitbart and me.

Unexpectedly.

Update:  Fixed a typo in paragraph 3 and woke from my overnight job to an Instalanche Thanks Stephen.  If you have the time please check out my extensive amount of interviews from CPAC,  (my latest with Senator Santorum is here) There were so many that even with two posts a day with two interviews per post  they won’t all be up till the 13th just check the bottom of the Santorum post and keep scrolling.  Interviews with Cynthia Yockey, James O’Keefe, The Former head of CPAC & the NRA David Keene, Lee Stranahan and more still to come.

Update 2:  Commentator Bill Peschell notes the NYT online links an AP story on the result.  so noted

Update 3:  Commentator Cardinal ACK notes the voice of Rutland online doesn’t consider the city liberal.  However in the last election Hillary Clinton beat Donald Trump by 46% to 42% with  Johnson at 3% and Stein at 1.5% and 59.9 % of the vote in the primaries were cast in the Democrat race vs the GOP.

I suppose for Vermont that as liberal as most

***************************

 

2016 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

If you like and you trust what you see here and want to help pay for it (not to mention mitigate the costs of hospital bills and debt from work that both my wife and missing as she recovers from her “routine” surgery please consider hitting DaTipJar




Olimometer 2.52

Please consider Subscribing. You can be listed as a Friend of DaTechguy blog for as little as $2 a week. If only 130 of the unique visitors who came in 2016 .07% subscribed at the same levels as our current subscription base we would make our current annual goal with ease. If we could boost that number to 260 I could afford to cover major events in person all over the country and do this full time every day.

Remember all subscribers get my weekly podcast emailed directly to you before it goes up anywhere else.


Choose a Subscription level



If you are not