aquapub
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2005
- Messages
- 7,317
- Reaction score
- 344
- Location
- America (A.K.A., a red state)
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
5-Step Propaganda 101
In the New York Times' daily ritual of lying for the enemy, they recently set their cites on crying witch hunt for the radical front group for Hammas and Hezbollah known as "CAIR."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/washington/14cair.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
1) It falsely marginalizes the many people who see the group (which was founded by Hammas, is funded by terror states, and has at least one unindicted co-conspirator of a plot to blow up New York City landmarks serving on its advisory board-Siraj Wahhaj) as a subversive terror-apologist group with strong ties to the enemy:
"A small band of critics have made a determined but unsuccessful effort to link it to Hamas and Hezbollah."
The purpose of this is to lay the groundwork for accusing anyone who gets in the way of this pro-terror group of McCarthyism.
2) They show a list of Democrats endorsing the terror-group and then describes how they had to back away from their endorsements once the evil vast right-wing conspiracy dared to point out who they were supporting...Again, the purpose of which is to portray innocent Democrats as being smeared into silence and intimidated by McCarthyist fear-mongers.
3) They then talk about how the ACLU and the California Council of Churches (both seriously out of the mainstream) see nothing wrong with the group, and how the NYT wasn't aware of any criminal investigations against them (as if the government would tell them about ongoing investigations after the Times called terror cells to let them know the FBI was coming to raid them). They also added that they managed to find "more than one" government official to describe this as McCarthyism (finding a fringe minority to regurgitate the Times' far left positions is a common tactic they use to make themselves look less far left).
4) Then, for the appearance of balance, they ackowledge that 5 of the group's leaders/affiliates have been charged/deported over connections with terror groups...but then they selectively point out that one of them got deported even though there were never any official charges filed, again, to misrepresent this all as some sort of a witch hunt.
5) It concludes by citing unnamed "government officials" (when the Times does this, most of us have learned repeatedly to be less than trusting) reinforcing the lie that "in the current climate, any hint of suspicious behavior would have resulted in a racketeering charge."
Now...Let's see the facts about this group the ACLU and other extensions of the Democrat party defends against "McCarthyism."
1) When the Holy Land Foundation was shut down for funding Hammas, these guys called it "unjust" and "disturbing."
2) The conviction of the perpetrators of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing it deemed "a travesty of justice."
3) The conviction of Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh who planned to blow up New York City landmarks, it called a "hate crime."
4) The extradition order for suspected Hamas terrorist Mousa Abu Marook it labeled "anti-Islamic" and "anti-American."
5) CAIR denied bin Laden's responsibility for the twin East African embassy bombings, even though a New York court assigned sole responsibility to Al Queda.
6) In October 1998 the group demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as "the sworn enemy," finding this depiction "offensive to Muslims."
If stating the obvious here about CAIR and about the ACLU/Democrats who support them is "McCarthyism," then "McCarthyism" must be a synonym for common sense.
In the New York Times' daily ritual of lying for the enemy, they recently set their cites on crying witch hunt for the radical front group for Hammas and Hezbollah known as "CAIR."
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/14/washington/14cair.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
1) It falsely marginalizes the many people who see the group (which was founded by Hammas, is funded by terror states, and has at least one unindicted co-conspirator of a plot to blow up New York City landmarks serving on its advisory board-Siraj Wahhaj) as a subversive terror-apologist group with strong ties to the enemy:
"A small band of critics have made a determined but unsuccessful effort to link it to Hamas and Hezbollah."
The purpose of this is to lay the groundwork for accusing anyone who gets in the way of this pro-terror group of McCarthyism.
2) They show a list of Democrats endorsing the terror-group and then describes how they had to back away from their endorsements once the evil vast right-wing conspiracy dared to point out who they were supporting...Again, the purpose of which is to portray innocent Democrats as being smeared into silence and intimidated by McCarthyist fear-mongers.
3) They then talk about how the ACLU and the California Council of Churches (both seriously out of the mainstream) see nothing wrong with the group, and how the NYT wasn't aware of any criminal investigations against them (as if the government would tell them about ongoing investigations after the Times called terror cells to let them know the FBI was coming to raid them). They also added that they managed to find "more than one" government official to describe this as McCarthyism (finding a fringe minority to regurgitate the Times' far left positions is a common tactic they use to make themselves look less far left).
4) Then, for the appearance of balance, they ackowledge that 5 of the group's leaders/affiliates have been charged/deported over connections with terror groups...but then they selectively point out that one of them got deported even though there were never any official charges filed, again, to misrepresent this all as some sort of a witch hunt.
5) It concludes by citing unnamed "government officials" (when the Times does this, most of us have learned repeatedly to be less than trusting) reinforcing the lie that "in the current climate, any hint of suspicious behavior would have resulted in a racketeering charge."
Now...Let's see the facts about this group the ACLU and other extensions of the Democrat party defends against "McCarthyism."
1) When the Holy Land Foundation was shut down for funding Hammas, these guys called it "unjust" and "disturbing."
2) The conviction of the perpetrators of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing it deemed "a travesty of justice."
3) The conviction of Omar Abdel Rahman, the blind sheikh who planned to blow up New York City landmarks, it called a "hate crime."
4) The extradition order for suspected Hamas terrorist Mousa Abu Marook it labeled "anti-Islamic" and "anti-American."
5) CAIR denied bin Laden's responsibility for the twin East African embassy bombings, even though a New York court assigned sole responsibility to Al Queda.
6) In October 1998 the group demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as "the sworn enemy," finding this depiction "offensive to Muslims."
If stating the obvious here about CAIR and about the ACLU/Democrats who support them is "McCarthyism," then "McCarthyism" must be a synonym for common sense.
Last edited: