Duke Lacrosse Accuser Crystal Mangum Charged With Murder

April 23, 2011

Boy has this chick come back to bite the lamestream media in the ass:

It was a tiny item in the New York Times — a brief at the bottom of page B14 of Tuesday’s sports section, under Lacrosse: “Crystal Mangum, who falsely accused three Duke players of raping her in 2006, was charged with murder in the death of her boyfriend.” The man died two weeks after Mangum stabbed him, and Mangum has now been charged with murder.


The Times may prefer to forget that name, but it was far more interested in Crystal Mangum back in 2006. More than any other media outlet, the Times trumpeted her rape accusations against three Duke lacrosse players, accusations that quickly fell apart in a mass of contradictions and shifting stories.


Yet even as the case fell apart and other liberal media outlets were backing away, the Times issued a now-notorious, error-riddled 5,000-word lead story by Duff Wilson on August 25, 2006, concluding that there was enough evidence against the players for Michael Nifong, the soon-to-be-disgraced-and-jailed local prosecutor, to bring the case to trial:


By disclosing pieces of evidence favorable to the defendants, the defense has created an image of a case heading for the rocks. But an examination of the entire 1,850 pages of evidence gathered by the prosecution in the four months after the accusation yields a more ambiguous picture. It shows that while there are big weaknesses in Mr. Nifong’s case, there is also a body of evidence to support his decision to take the matter to a jury.


Perhaps most atrocious was former columnist Selena Roberts, who made a habit of slurring the innocent Duke lacrosse players. Even after the players had been all but formally cleared of the sexual assault, she continued to blame white privilege: “Don’t mess with Duke, though. To shine a light on its integrity has been treated by the irrational mighty as a threat to white privilege. Feel free to excoriate the African-American basketball stars and football behemoths for the misdeeds of all athletes, but lay off the lacrosse pipeline to Wall Street, excuse the khaki-pants crowd of SAT wonder kids.”

it is very hard for men to protect themselves from women whose testimony is full of contradictions. the media and liberal judges don’t do a thing when a woman commits perjury.


I’m starting to think that the college #Gaza and #BDS crowd needs a #Playboy Bunny, #HelenThomas ain’t working

March 20, 2011

Helen Thomas to Playboy: Let Me Clarify:
Jews Control White House,
Congress, Financial Markets

…as being just as ugly inside as she is on the outside:

Of course I don’t condone any violence against anyone. But who wouldn’t fight for their country? What would any American do if their land was being taken? Remember Pearl Harbor. The Palestinian violence is to protect what little remains of Palestine. The suicide bombers act out of despair and desperation. Three generations of Palestinians have been forced out of their homes – by Israelis – and into refugee camps.”

Yes, she really compares terrorists blowing up an ice cream parlor filled with kids to Americans fighting in the Pacific in World War II.
And that’s only a tiny part of this interview that exposes Thomas as a thoroughly despicable human being, and those who defend her as being hypocrites of the highest order.

Veteran reporter Helen Thomas turned up in Playboy magazine this month (fully clothed, don’t worry) as part of her ongoing anti-Semitic publicity tour.
The former “dean” of the White House Press Corps sat down for an interview (link is to the Sun Herald’s summary) about her recent controversy. First she weighed in on the aftermath of her remarks about Israel last May (“I went into self-imposed house arrest”) and her views on the situation in the Palestinian territories (“the Palestinians have been shortchanged in every way”). But then the interview took an uglier turn.
“Of course I don’t condone any violence against anyone,” said Thomas, when asked about Palestinian terrorism against the Israelis. “But who wouldn’t fight for their country? What would any American do if their land was being taken? Remember Pearl Harbor. The Palestinian violence is to protect what little remains of Palestine. The suicide bombers act out of despair and desperation.”
Thomas also took a shot at Holocaust-remembrance programs, insisting that Jews exploited the memory in order to persecute Palestinians. “There’s nothing wrong with remembering [the Holocaust], but why do we have to constantly remember? We’re not at fault,” said Thomas, adding, “Do the Jews ever look at themselves? Why are they always right? Because they have been oppressed throughout history, I know. And they have this persecution. That’s true, but they shouldn’t use that to dominate.”
And in case there’s anyone out there who’s still unsure about Thomas’s true feelings toward the Jewish people, she clarified them later in the interview.
“[The Jews are] using their power, and they have power in every direction,” she said. “Power over the White House, power over Congress. … Everybody is in the pocket of the Israeli lobbies, which are funded by wealthy supporters, including those from Hollywood.  Same thing with the financial markets. There’s total control.”
Thomas then looked at the interviewer and asked, “You don’t deny that. You’re Jewish, aren’t you?”
The 90-year-old reporter’s worldview, in fact, seems to be clouded with an obsession over who is a Jew. When asked about her views on Congress, Thomas simply listed off the names of Jewish lawmakers and intoned that they would be anti-Arab. “Do you think [Chuck] Schumer and [Rep. Ileana Ros-] Lehtinen — whatever her name is — in Florida are going to be pro-Arab?” she asked. “No. But they’re going to be very influential. Eric Cantor, the majority leader of the Republicans, do you think he’s going to be for the Arabs? Hell no! I’m telling you, you cannot get 330 votes in Congress for anything that’s pro-Arab. Nothing.”
Thomas’s comments are indicative of an extremely disturbed and damaged person. But even as she shoots off textbook anti-Semitic canards, she vigorously denies that she’s anti-Jewish.
“I think they’re wonderful people,” she says of the Jews. “They had to have the most depth. They were leaders in civil rights. They’ve always had the heart for others but not for Arabs, for some reason. I’m not anti-Jewish; I’m anti-Zionist.”
Not everyone who calls himself an anti-Zionist is anti-Semitic. But there are many, many anti-Semites, like Thomas, who hide behind the façade of anti-Zionism. And the fact that she was able to do this while in the spotlight for so many years makes one worry for the state of the media.


YouTube Censors Fogel family from Itamar

March 14, 2011

The government released the photos on Saturday night. Within hours, the social activism website My Israel posted a short video of the photographs on YouTube along with the names and ages of the victims.

Within two hours YouTube removed the video.

Obviously YouTube managers are not interested in being held responsible for someone noticing that genocidal Jew hatred defines Palestinian society – and the Arab world as a whole. But they really have no reason to be concerned. Even if they had allowed the video to be posted for more than an hour, it wouldn’t have made a difference.

CNN… sigh.  A statement released by the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades took responsibility for the killings, describing the slaughter of the Fogel family as a “natural response” to “Israeli crimes.”
Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

Leave a Comment » | Abbas, Abu Mazen, Accuracy in Media, BBC, CNN, CNN is FRAUD, Fogel, Google, media bias, Reuters, YouTube | Permalink
Posted by Noah Simon


Reuters handles public relations for Palestinians

March 14, 2011

A statement released by the Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades took responsibility for the killings, describing the slaughter of the Fogel family as a “natural response” to “Israeli crimes.” The Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades is part of Fatah which is run by Palestinian Authority President Abbas. In other words it was an official act of the Palestinian Authority.

In an appalling example of bias and selective reporting known in propaganda studies as card stacking, Reuters correspondent Dan Williams rushes in to provide PR for Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas as he feigns horror at the slaughter of a Jewish family over the weekend:

(Reuters) – Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said on Monday the killing of a Jewish settler couple and three of their children was “inhuman,” telling Israel he was determined to help catch those responsible.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had complained that Abbas’s administration insufficiently condemned the attack and even encouraged such bloodshed through “incitement” in official Palestinian forums.
“This was inhuman and immoral. We deplore this incident, without a doubt. It is an abomination,” Abbas told Israel Radio.
“I can’t imagine a four-month-old child murdered,” he said, speaking in Arabic. “Children, of all things … Any person who has a sense of humanity would be pained and driven to tears by such sights.”

At the same time Abbas was crying crocodile tears for the children who had their throats cut, his political party was officially celebrating the murder of 37 Israelis, including 13 children, with the naming of a town square after the Palestinian terrorist who led the attack.
Two years ago, Abbas personally congratulated the family of Palestinian Samir Kuntar for his release in a prisoner exchange with Israel.  Kuntar murdered three Israelis including a father and his 4-year-old daughter whose skull Kuntar had crushed with the butt of a gun.
While Williams is quick to parrot Abbas’ purported sympathy for murdered children, the Reuters correspondent is oddly silent on Abbas’ long record of sympathy for Palestinian child murderers.

…and this is just Reuters. What do you thing is going on at CNN and MSNBC… or for that matter NPR?

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

Leave a Comment » | Abbas, Abu Mazen, Accuracy in Media, Dan Williams, Main Stream Media, Media, media bias, Reuters, Samir Kuntat | Permalink
Posted by Noah Simon


Clinton: ‘Lebanese Armed Forces are professional and non-sectarian’

March 4, 2011

Hillary Clinton told the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Wednesday that the Lebanese Armed Forces are ‘professional and non-sectarian’ and therefore the US should continue its assistance to them – despite the fact that Hezbullah is about to become the country’s ruling party.

She really wants control, but these are forces even Hitlery can not pull the strings with.

Hillary Clinton: America is Losing An Information War to Al Jazeera

Notice that Hillary is asking for money for public media aka propaganda. Do you really trust Obama to create the rhetoric? There are plenty of Pro American voices being heard. Perhaps it is just that the voice being heard doesn’t trust Hillary and enablers of Jihad?

From Accuracy in Media‘s Don Irvine:
Secretary of State  Hillary Clinton appeared before the U.S. Foreign Policy Priorities Committee yesterday, stating that counter to our history we are are now “losing an information war” to other countries.
Clinton also told the committee that private media isn’t up to the task of fighting the information war:

“Our private media cannot fill that gap. In fact our private media, particularly cultural programming often works at counter purposes to what we truly are as Americans and what our values are.  I remember having an Afghan general tell me that the only thing he thought about Americans is that all the men wrestled and the women walked around in bikinis because the only TV he ever saw was Baywatch and World Wide Wrestling.”

Full story and video here.

Hitlery is a common way of adressing Hillary Clinton. via urbandictionary.com
Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy in Media, al-Jazeera, Clinton, Hezballah, Hezbollah, Hezbullah, Hillary Clinton, Hitlery, HitleryClinton, Hizbullah, Lebanese soldiers, Lebanon, Lebanon Defense Forces, media bias | Permalink
Posted by Noah Simon


Can you explain this?

February 22, 2011

Everyone and their dog have been kind enough to send me this lovely video….

Any thoughts on how it was achieved?

Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy in Media, illusions | Permalink
Posted by Noah Simon


How the Internet Destroyed American Politics

December 9, 2010
Politicians have realized that by lowering the barriers to political involvement they can attract people who otherwise wouldn’t care. And so we have an entire class of people who are involved in politics because they think Obama’s posters look cool or because they’re angry that Sarah Palin’s daughter almost won Dancing with the Stars. Call them the Alvin Greene vote. They don’t understand a single issue, not even the dimmest populist ones, but they are emotionally involved with the image that the candidates project. They vote based on Saturday Night Live skits or what they hear on The View. Often young and dumb, for politicians they’re an important target group. And they make up an increasingly large share of media consumers.

the internet has eroded the firewall between the American political process and the rest of the world. The damage that Soros and Assange have been able to do to America should be a wake-up call in that regard.

A lot of the world feels it should have a say in American elections, and 2008 was the first time they got a say. It will probably not be the last.

We don’t know how much foreign money Obama received in 2008, but it’s safe to say that this will continue to be a problem, and without rigid legal accountability, this will become a pattern in future elections. With every candidate soliciting online donations, it becomes all too easy for money to trickle in from abroad. Accountability may close that door part of the way, but not all the way, because too many 501c’s also have an impact on the political process. As do many groups that are not directly involved in elections, but do play a part and can legally receive money from overseas. It will take hard work to insulate the American political process from foreign donations. And with the rise of foreign exchange trading and online gambling interests based overseas who work through American front companies, that may no longer be possible.

And foreign money is the least of the problem. With social media playing such a major role, foreign campaigners will become ubiquitous. The Obama campaign benefited from a social media network that was often very “international”. In the age of the internet, it becomes all too easy to run phone banks out of Gaza, raise money in Moscow and have stories that shake up the campaign appear in The Guardian. When enough of the campaign is being outsourced, it becomes impossible to regulate or track who does or says what on the internet. And that means anti-American candidates for public office now have a base of support that they can rely on. It worked for Obama. But it won’t end there.

The only thing that could avert this would be if such conduct were viewed as scandalous, but the media is unlikely to treat the outsourcing of a campaign as scandalous, unless it’s done by a candidate they don’t like. Which means punishing a politician for his politics, rather than his actions, another reminder of why the media cannot be trusted to vet candidates or do anything but act as cheerleaders for their man or woman.

The internet is international and it is internationalizing American elections. We are now told which candidate has international approval. We have campaign rallies overseas. We have money coming in from abroad and unofficial campaign volunteers operating abroad. And that is only be the beginning.

Technology has erased distance, and that means the end of all forms of isolation, privacy and integrity. It has also erased standards and barriers. It is up to us to try and create new standards in the age of the internet. If we fail to do this, then the medium will go on dictating the message.

Leave a Comment » | Accuracy in Media, Barack Obama, Cyber Jihad, cyber war, Main Stream Media, Mass Media, Media, media bias, Media Rape, Panopticon, Sarah Palin, tech, Technology | Permalink
Posted by Noah Simon