Great post, Leo.

Washington Times writer Diana West, notes the MSM's fifth column-ness in her article, "Media Bombs"

But 26 percent looms large when it describes the number of American Muslims, ages 18-29, who support suicide bombings "in defense of Islam" -- one of the sensational, if sensationally under-reported, findings of a recent Pew poll. According to Pew, the total Muslim population in America is 2.35 million, 30 percent of whom are between 18 and 29. By my figuring, the suicide-bomb-approving cohort works out to 183,000 people.

[..]In the case of suicide bombing, however, the context changes. According to Pew's data, one-quarter of younger American Muslims approve of the presence of skin-ripping, skull-crushing, organ-piercing violence in civilian life as a religious imperative -- "in defense of Islam." (The Pew pollsters declined to define "defense of Islam," but having lived through Pope Rage, Cartoon Rage, Koran Rage, Satanic Verses Rage, etc., I think it's safe to say this is a rather broad category.) Such approval for religious violence is not just another unfettered political opinion finding expression in a poll-taker's tally. On the contrary, the fact that a significant young chunk of American Islam believes such violence has a place in society indicates something closer to the end of unfettered political opinion. It may signal the beginning of physical coercion as a factor in the American political process.

[..]Something new and barbarous under the sun, right? This is why it's all the more disturbing to review the happy headline-spin the story received. The blogger Ace of Spades provided an early roundup of the Orwellian tags, which included: "Poll: Most Muslims seek to adopt American lifestyle" (USA Today); "Muslims assimilate better in U.S. than Europe, poll finds" (New York Times); "Poll: US Muslims Feel Post-9/11 Backlash Despite Moderate Outlook" (Voice of America). My personal fave: "Upbeat portrait of US Muslims" (Sacramento Bee). The accompanying stories were no less giddy.

But why the journalistic rush to depict the shocking story as so much happy talk? Therein lies a tale, one of fanatical religious fervor-on the part of the mainstream media (MSM). Like other politically correct elites, the MSM follow their own version of the "true faith": multiculturalism. Multiculturalism preaches that all civilizations are the same, all religions are the same, all peoples are the same. The Pew results, meanwhile, tell them something else again: Some people -- some young American Muslim people -- approve of suicide bombing in defense of Islam. Does this finding perhaps introduce a qualitative difference among civilizations, religions, and peoples? That is, is there something more desirable about societies that don't inspire and glorify suicide bombings -- something worth preserving? Conversely, is there something about Islam our own society requires protection against? This is very tricky territory for the MSM. The logical answers are multiculturally blasphemous.

American Flag Salute!

Media Totally Ignore Al Qaeda Torture Manual

You do understand that the "Fifth Column" in the Spanish Civil War referred to supporters of the Right who were undermining the democratically-elected, leftist government of Spain - don't you? Just thought I'd point that out...

And while you are slamming the MSM for not understanding "loose lips sink ships", you do understand that Mr Bush has no problem revealing sensitive military/intel information if he thinks that will score political points - don't you?

Aaron:
Spot on dude!

.......you do understand that Mr Bush has no problem revealing sensitive military/intel information if he thinks that will score political points - don't you? - airheadtime

I assume you have proof of that, don't you?

It's apparent to me that the NYT has had no problem publishing sensitive information to sell papers despite the please from the administration no to. That would include the NSA and the terrorist financial tracing programs. It's also obvious that the CIA is littered with people who feel that national secrets can or can not be divulged solely at their discretion.

Those people should be tried for treason.

Many on the left feel that GW's policies create more terrorism and I would argue that the actions of the MSM and the cowardly encouragement by the people like airheadtime are the ones who encourage and create more terrorists.

Mr Bush has no problem revealing sensitive military/intel information if he thinks that will score political points - don't you? - airheadtime

I will expect concrete proof of this assertion within the next few hours. Lack of proof will only solidify airheads position as that of an ignorant political partisan hack.

As if we didn't already know that.

What say you airhead?

That's a lie actually there Freedom1, many news sites covered the torture manual story, I read about it on all of the major ones---NBC, ABC, Faux, BBC.

Neocon, if you insult those you are arguing with it only weakens your case and shows you to be grasping for rational things to say.

How again is reporting about Gitmo or the newest unconstitutional deed by the Bush admin treason? There needs to be accountability somewhere guy, or else presidents could do whatever they want whenever they want to. When this administration is disbanding habeas corpus, allowing legal wiretapping without warrants on US citizens, or enacting something like the Patriot Act, which is completely unconcstitutional, THAT is treason. When you lead your country into a war based on bad intel, bad intel that you KNEW at the time was NOT true and had NO evidence of, THAT is treason. Bush should be on trial for treason, not the NY Times.

Seriously, since when did the media hold such power over world events? Last time I checked the leader of the number one superpower in the world holds a hell of alot more power and responsibility over world affairs then a (expletive deleted) newspaper does. Do you honestly think Al-Qaeda subscribes to the NY Times? Are you really saying something as absurd as that?

Oh, and for the evidence neocon, Bush has declassified many documents on the Iraq war and released them to the press in order to help bolster his case for war in Iraq.

Here's a link--

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2007/05/bush_declassifi.html

There's your evidence. Care to dispute it?

Colin,

Your comments are extraordinarily boring - just mindlessly repeated leftwing talking points. Most of our lefty commenters here are of a high quality - if you want to be taken seriously, you'll have to do far better than the drivel you've posted so far.

Aaron,

Its highly appropriate, then, to use the term "fifth column"...given that you on the left are working diligently for the victory of the Islamo-FASCISTS, ya know?

Two points:

(1) the idea that the political left supports fascist Islam because they disagree with the Bush Doctrine is ridiculous. Further - its just the same old drivel that has been pushed for several years now. The "either you agree with me or you support terrorism" stance is not just invalid - its really disgusting. Its disgusting that people have to resort to accusing people of supporting terrorists if they disagree with Bush's policies.
So just cut it out - its as you would say a "talking point" of the right.

(2) The idea that the media is responsible for this is just a total and absolute joke. Do you really believe that your average terrorist is watching msnbc to decide how to act? If anything - the failure of the media is exactly the other way. During the build up to the Iraq war - there was essentially zero serious reporting done on the situation - they just bought the Bush line hook line an sinker. And what is really bad about it is that you can go back and look at the archives between the American and British media and compare that to what other places were saying at the time. I really encourage you to do that - its mind blowing. Most of the rest of the world media was highly critical of this idea from day 1. If there is a problem with the main stream media - which there is - it is that it a for profit business owned by corporations who have very specific agendas...

"Your comments are extraordinarily boring - just mindlessly repeated leftwing talking points"
That's why the retarded right is so much fun...to them the truth is boring...why not make something up, it's much more fun...Oh, I've got one...We're not losing a battle....but for the sake of argument, hypothetically speaking, if we were losing...it must be the Medias fault, but we’re not losing so the media is fine...unless we are losing, then they're traitors, but we're not, so it's a mute point...

But they HATE Bush, so we'll blame them anyway for losing a battle that we're not losing
Besides, the Media's super secrete agenda of making more money is obviously bolstered by the destruction of our Nation...yeah, that works...
I say run with it righties!

"Completely missing today in their equation of First Amendment powers is an accompanying ethos to utilize those powers responsibly."
That's Retarded Right code for "why won't you just report what we want you to report, geeze, what do we have to do, call you traitors first before you do what WE want?"

"these useful idiots are either wittingly or unwittingly duped into playing into the hands of our bloodthirsty enemies (remember--those guys who want to murder as many of us as they can??)"
Sorry, I guess we got preoccupied with Iraq and forgot about the actual bloodthirsty enemies...does this mean we're going to finally go and fight them? Oh wait, guess we need to clean up Bush's mess first, then on to the enemy...right?

Do you really believe that your average terrorist is watching msnbc to decide how to act? - kblack

If think that the terrorists don't pay attention to our media, then you are more far gone then I gave you credit for. They pay very close attnetion to our media, our polls and the left. That is how they will defeat us because they can not achieve any military victory. Do you not remember the "paper tiger" comment from UBL.

How again is reporting about Gitmo or the newest unconstitutional deed by the Bush admin treason? There needs to be accountability somewhere guy, or else presidents could do whatever they want whenever they want to. When this administration is disbanding habeas corpus, allowing legal wiretapping without warrants on US citizens, or enacting something like the Patriot Act, which is completely unconcstitutional, THAT is treason. When you lead your country into a war based on bad intel, bad intel that you KNEW at the time was NOT true and had NO evidence of, THAT is treason. Bush should be on trial for treason, not the NY Times. - colin

How brain dead do you have to be to continue to repeat the same old tired debunked refrain time after time after time? Cindy Sheehan is a Rhodes Scholar compared to you colin.

And I guess we can all now consider Airheadtime a complete ignorant political partisan hack. It's official.

Seriously kblack, I gave you much more credit for common sense than that.

If there is a problem with the main stream media - which there is - it is that it a for profit business owned by corporations who have very specific agendas... kblack

Good Lord son, you really need an education. "For Profit" business's are NOT the problem, only in your communist little mind does that become a problem. Their agenda is TOO MAKE MONEY, and unfortunately divulging sensitive national information does not slow them down in their zeal to make that money. Combine that with a left leaning bent and an administration without the backbone to go after them and therein lies the problem.

my point isn't that they are completely unaware of the msm media. My point is that it doesn't affect what they do. Would you seriously argue that if they showed pro - Bush stuff 24/7 it would change their agenda? Fox news doesn't seem to have any effects on them...

Oh -

and my point is not that the problem is the media is for profit - in and of itself. My problem is that all of main stream media is owned by huge corporations (GE, Microsoft, and the like). Many of these companies have goals that conflict with straight forward unbiased reporting (if its towards the right or the left). However, its its sold as if its completely unbiased. Really what I would like to see is more government assistance to independent media. Its really the only thing that you can read and know that they aren't just trying to sell you a line that is best for the corporate interest...

Deleted - overly insulting

Most of our lefty commenters here are of a high quality -

Posted by: Mark Noonan at May 26, 2007 02:00 PM

Mark, I doubt very much if any Bush supporters who post here will agree with that statement.
Keefer would be the first one to come to mind.

CO,

Oh, I think keefer would think you're first rate...he would just hold that being left is to be automatically rather fourth rate.

:o)

colin,

Pay attention to kblack - that would be a good first step as you rise towards CO, and maybe even Ricorun levels of comments.

Kblack,

We can only see what we see - and what we see is a fanatic determination on the part of the American left to have us defeated in Iraq. Now, this is either monumental stupidity, or being favorable to our Islamo-fascist enemies. I'm being generous with you when I say you're pro-Islamist.

Opus,

Call it what you will, but we've been over Colin's points endlessly. He's boring.

When exactly was any of what colin posted debunked? I assume you have proof of that, don't you? othwerwise you're just a complete ignorant political partisan hack. - opus

Pay attention, I am only going to do this one last time:

How again is reporting about Gitmo or the newest unconstitutional deed by the Bush admin treason?

There is NOTHING unconstitutional about Gitmo, in fact what is unconstitutional is wanting to give enemy combatants Geneva rights. Secondly the Red Cross has a permanent presence at Gitmo, and Human Rights Watch monitors it closely.

When this administration is disbanding habeas corpus

Habeus Corpus is alive and well except for enemy combatants. Enemy combatants do not enjoy the protection of the US constitution because why? THEY'RE NOT CITIZENS!

allowing legal wiretapping without warrants on US citizens

The US Supreme Court vetted the NSA program and deemed it viable and legal. The prgram is also aimed AT TERRORISTS!!!!

or enacting something like the Patriot Act, which is completely unconcstitutional, THAT is treason

Why would the Patriot Act, if it was unconstitutional garner the majority of support for approval from the Democrats. Hint: it's not unconstitutional, look it up!!!!

When you lead your country into a war based on bad intel, bad intel that you KNEW at the time was NOT true and had NO evidence of, THAT is treason. Bush should be on trial for treason, not the NY Times

Prove Bush knew that the same intelligence Clinton, Bush I, France, England, Austrailia, Germany, Russia, Saudia Aarabia, Jordan, Turkey, Israel etc, etc, etc, all believed to be true, was not. Prove it!!!!!!!

Secondly, the Kurds can support the evidence of Saddam having WMD. Just saying.

Learn something, grow a spine, quit listening to Rosie and Cindy and stop embarrasing yourself.

Mark: Pay attention to kblack - that would be a good first step as you rise towards CO, and maybe even Ricorun levels of comments.

Apparently the grading system has more to do with loyalty than competence. I guess that figures, lol!

Apparently the grading system has more to do with loyalty than competence. I guess that figures, lol! - ricorun

You can't grade liberals on competence ricorun. I haven't met one yet that has any.

No Mark.

Because someone disagrees with the methods, policies, and philosophy of the Bush Doctrine does not imply either stupidity or support of terrorism. The inconvenient fact that you always ignore is that 16 different intelligence agencies concluded that Bush's actions have lead to INCREASED terrorism in the world and an INCREASED threat against the US. Its not stupidity - its taking a look around. Taking your head out of the sand to see if your ideology is actually working and realizing it isn't. Look you can just continue to hope that somehow a miracle will occur and the last 4 years will magically reverse itself or you can wake up and start to address those failures..
If you don't address them - its an absolute certainty that you will fail - so why do you support something that we know has failed? You must love terrorism (?)

The inconvenient fact that you always ignore is that 16 different intelligence agencies concluded that Bush's actions have lead to INCREASED terrorism in the world and an INCREASED threat against the US. - kblack

Haven't we been over this kblack? THOSE ARE THE SAME INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES THAT GOT THE WMD ISSUE WRONG! But now you buy their intelligence hook, line and sinker because it supports YOUR agenda. And if an increase in terrorism means a dead Saddam, a dead Zarqawi, UBL in a cave and no incident on US soil combined with several thwarted attempts, I'll take that increase all day long.

Look you can just continue to hope that somehow a miracle will occur and the last 4 years will magically reverse itself or you can wake up and start to address those failures.. kblack

I'll bet Saddam doesn't think the last four years were a failure (if he could think), I'll bet the Taliban doesn't think they were a failure, I'll bet Zarqawi doesn't think they were a failure, I'll bet Uday and Qasi doesn't think they were a failure, etc. The only ones thinking the last four years were a failure are the people that supported the aforementioned people.

See yourself anywhere in there kblack?

You must love terrorism (?) kblack

The mother of all strawmen.

You're just getting desperate now kblack, it's embarassing.

Because someone disagrees with the methods, policies, and philosophy of the Bush Doctrine does not imply either stupidity or support of terrorism. kblack

No, but it strongly suggests it.

LOL

Neocon
(1) NO - the difference is that in the case of WMDs it was not overwhelming thought here and around the world that Saddam had WMDs. In fact the Bush Administration kept pushing until they came up with some garbage that even - at the time - the CIA was not convinced of. Further - outside of the US - nobody believed this except for the British - its a matter of public record - no other agency felt that Saddam was on the brink of getting WMDS.

Unlike in this case where it is a very widely held belief around the world and here that this has lead to greater terrorism...
Completely different.

(2) Hmm, Bin Laden is still at large. Iraq is a total and complete disaster and terrorism is on the rise. Yes - you may have killed some terrorists but you have created many more and created a lot more supporters of extremism in the process.

(3) the terrorist thing was a JOKE - making fun of your ridiculous agenda. Typical that you would be so wrapped up in the idea that you would take it seriously...

Come no neocon you can do better than that..

CARACAS (Reuters) - Tens of thousands of Venezuelan protesters marched on Saturday to the Caracas headquarters of an anti-government television station, which is being forced off the air after President Hugo Chavez's administration refused to renew its broadcasting license.

Hey kblack, here's what's happening with your buddy Chavez. Weren't you telling us a while ago how "socialist" his country was and how "democratically elected" he was. Kind of the same way Saddam won all those elections huh?

(2) Hmm, Bin Laden is still at large. Iraq is a total and complete disaster and terrorism is on the rise. Yes - you may have killed some terrorists but you have created many more and created a lot more supporters of extremism in the process.

Bin Laden, if not dead, is severely marginalized and hiding in a cave (unless he's at your house). Iraq is a total disaster? Have you not read any of the military accounts? Or are you depending on Olberman, Matthews and PMSNBC for your news. 90% of Iraq is going well, it's the car bombs you see on the nightly news that form your opinions. Try and expand your knowledge.

Also, pretty hard to beat Clintons record when it comes to fomenting terrorism. Clinton was resposnble for ignoring the threats which resulted in the Taliban owning Afghanistan, UBL planning 9/11, Zarqawi becoming a murderous leader which all resulted in innocent Americans dying at the Khobar Towers, The USS Cole, The African embassies and 9/11. He is also directly responsible for NK and Kim jung having the bomb. LIBERALS ARE F*&#KING JOKE WHEN IT COMES TO CONFRONTING TERRORISM. LEAVE IT TO THE ADULTS.

(3) the terrorist thing was a JOKE - making fun of your ridiculous agenda. Typical that you would be so wrapped up in the idea that you would take it seriously...kblack

This pretty much sums up the lefts position. Was Jakarta a joke? Was Beslan, Russia a joke? Was London a joke? Was Madrid a joke? Was 9/11 a joke?

You're a joke.

.....no other agency felt that Saddam was on the brink of getting WMDS.

Really? They thought he already possessed them, moron. That was the summary of the intelligence around the globe.

You kf#&*ck, are a liar.

....and an INCREASED threat against the US. - kblack

Actually I shouldn't be so hard on you. I am realizing now that you're just a scared little boy.

It's alright kblack, sometimes you have to stand up and fight instead of wishing and hoping things will get better and running away from the problems of the world. You'll learn that as you grow up.

Deleted - overly insulting

Opie,

Why don't you take your sewer muck and go report back to your handlers at KOS?

AAR

neocon: You can't grade liberals on competence ricorun. I haven't met one yet that has any.

So I guess it's all about loyalty then, huh? Mark certainly thinks I'm a libbie. And you have given every indication that you think similarly. Is that what you really think?

Just so you know, I don't really care. Like I told you before, I don't do talking points. I do my own research, I think for myself. My party affiliation is deserved the old way: they earn it.

But let me ask you... do you think I'm intellectually competent apart from whatever stand I take, whether or not you happen to agree with it or not?

That's an important question, because I get the impression that you are not inclined to engage anyone in an argument for which you don't have a ready answer for. I've seen it in past threads that you've "demanded" I reply to you and I have. And then nothing. Likewise, I've seen you demand responses from others -- with both time-line and benchmark requirements, lol! -- and your only response to them was... they're idiots. Oh please.

With respect to the question at hand, the fact is: Bush's decision to surrepetitiously declassify info in the 2002 NIE and have Cheney leak the info to reporters through Scooter for no apparent reason but to counter Joe Wilson's claims is very hard to argue that it wasn't done for political advantage. As far as the other examples Colin documented, well... maybe. Perhaps even probably. But the real question is... so what? Washington is a tough town and they play hardball. Cry me a freakin' river.

That should have been your answer - assuming that's your sentiment. If not, then what is it?

With respect to the question at hand, the fact is: Bush's decision to surrepetitiously declassify info in the 2002 NIE and have Cheney leak the info to reporters through Scooter for no apparent reason but to counter Joe Wilson's claims is very hard to argue that it wasn't done for political advantage. As far as the other examples Colin documented, well... maybe. Perhaps even probably. But the real question is... so what? Washington is a tough town and they play hardball. Cry me a freakin' river. - ricorun

Very hard to take you seriously when you spew drivel like this. Jow Wilson is a fraud and his trip to Niger actually reinforced the notion that Saddam was looking to obtain uranium, even the British still stand by that. Washington is a tough town, and Valerie Plame and her sham of a husband are the biggest losers.

I do think of you as reasonably intelligent with a certain amount of moxie, otherwise you wouldn't stand and take the heat as much as you do. But as far as doing your own research, it's quite apparent to me that your sources are suspect at best.

"They thought he already possessed them, moron. That was the summary of the intelligence around the globe."
-Well, except for CIA, NSA, Naval Intelligence, Europe and Asia...see above...moron (what,are you in the 4th grade...moron?)

Hey dipstick, ask the Kurds about Saddams WMD program and then draw a line to the present. Then if you had the balls to look any further, I am sure Syria could tell you where they are. All of the aforementioned agencies KNEW of his previous programs, THAT'S NOT THE QUESTION, the question is what happened to them.

...really, do you just get off by spewing BS and believing it's true...does it make you feel better. give you a warm fuzzy feeling inside...must be fun to be on the retarded right...just hope you idiots don't get us all killed

You're a complete waste of flesh and this is the last time I WILL EVER address you. You obviously are on some mindless "Cindy Sheehan" brain dead loop of drivel. Ciao.

neocon: Very hard to take you seriously when you spew drivel like this.

What part of it is drivel? As far as I know, everything I said is accurate -- and has been acknowledged up to and including President Bush.
And his argument was the same as mine... so what?

Bush did it (leaked the NIE info), he claims (in effect), because Joe Wilson was a gas bag -- and that is also an opinion I concurred with many months ago. On this site even. Nonetheless, given the evidence and its bona fides, it is hard to conclude that the NIE leak was motivated on anything but political grounds. But again, so what? You heard me when I said that, right? You can call me any name you want, take me as seriously or as spuriously as you want, but all that gas doesn't absolve you from answering the argument. And you have not done that. All you've done is respond on the level you claim you hate: talking points. You're no better than kblack. So pardon me if I don't take you seriously.

kblack sputters ... "Do you really believe that your average terrorist is watching msnbc to decide how to act?"

Yes, they watch the msm (most likely cnn - aka communist news network) and decide how to "act" or "speak". If all Americans were (truely) FOR defeating the terrorists, AQ would have NO need to parrot leftwing talking points in their videos.

Oh, I think keefer would think you're first rate...he would just hold that being left is to be automatically rather fourth rate.

Sorry, Mark, but in my book, CO is only a notch or two above kblockhead. CO repeats the same crap endlessly. kblockhead repeats the same talking points endlessly. And when one rips his posts to shreds, kblockhead completely ignores it, as if nothing happened. He's sorta like Jackoff Murtha.

As for the second part of your statement, Mark, I totally agree. I have nothing but contempt for the lockstep leftists on this site, and in this country. They all think alike, and they all sound alike. There have been a few, however, who've offered semi-logical posts here. Rico, however, isn't one; he's not, in my book, one of the loony left, and he keeps it real, even when I disagree with him, which is often.

neocon, you're wasting your time with kblockhead and Opussy. One's a brain-dead lemming; the other's an abortion gone bad. Neither have ever offered any proof to any of their b/s, and both belong in mental institutions.

Look - neocon - I am not going to rehash the argument about the intelligence about WMDs. Take a look at the numerous other posts - or start paying attention to what actually happens - not what you want to happen. Unfortunately the two are not the same thing..

Kimberly - if you are serious - which unfortunately I think you are - then I agree all we have to do is ban every other news station except for Fox and then everything will magically be better.. Clap your hands if you believe in fox news, i do believe I do believe

neocon, let's you and I have an intelligent discourse, without kblockhead. Well, if kblockhead joined our conversation, it would no longer qualify as intelligent.

Anyway, you and I, and many others not suffering from BDS, know full well that Saddam either had them and moved them, or that he was working to reinstate his WMD program as soon as the sanctions were lifted. The David Kay report, while claiming there were "no stockpiles" of WMD in Iraq, stated that Saddam was working to reinstate the program.

My theory, and it's just a theory, is that Saddam was using the Oil for Palaces program to bribe key players in the international game, so he could get those pesky sanctions removed ASAP, thereby facilitating his quest to return to days of old, and get his hands on materials for his stalled WMD program.

As for Bin Laden, it was a talking point created by the Spitball Kerry 2004 campaign. To listen to the lefty kooks, you have to believe that we had Bin Laden in cuffs and leg irons, and handed him the keys while we looked the other way. That's what the kblockheads of the world believe, so why fret over it? Granted, a dead/captured Bin Laden would be great, but it would hardly create a bunch of flag-waving libs. Nor would it end the Global War on Terror. Hell, a replacement in Afghanistan has already been named, so Bin Laden will probably never leave the Pakistan cave/village he is hiding in--if he is even capable at this point.

neocon, here are my top ten picks for B4B's lib troll moron lockstepping idiot:

1. kblockhead77--there's noone stupider than this a$$hat.
2. Opussy--all emotion, all hatred, all the time.
3. Erica--two chicken nuggets short of a happy meal. Cheers!
4. Jay Gutsofjello--equates antrax attack with 9/11. Got any proof that AQ did it, Jaybird?
5. raper13--if only his mommy would lock the basement door...
6. Cavalor Idiot, Esquire--smartest man in the room, as long as the room was empty before he entered.
7. Saliva--no credibility, all emotion, likes to piggyback on fellow kook's posts.
8. bel--reincarnation of BarneyG2000, whom we all miss...not!!!
9. congressive--David Broder, anyone?
10. Canadian Observer--wasn't in the top ten, but his constant touting of Russ Feingold, the second stupidest man in the Senate, put him in.

There are many others, neocon, who are currently active on B4B, and some who have been banned. For the most part, they are in lockstep with the DNC, George Soros, and Elsie O'Donnell.

Equate this blog to the old television show "Lost in Space." All the troll kooks are Dr. Smith...

i consider it a great honor that I top your list. Of course this means that I must be doing everything right...

kblack77,

No, that means you are far out in left field!

AAR

Re: Media Totally Ignore Al Qaeda Torture Manual, what I should have said is that the MSM gave it all of two minutes of coverage whereas, the NYTimes gave the Abu Ghraib story 37 days of front page coverage. Hardly fair and un-biased reporting from the MSM.

i consider it a great honor that I top your list. Of course this means that I must be doing everything right...

Tranlation: I agree--there's noone stupider than I on this entire blog, and I'm a king-sized a$$hat. Thank God for mommy and her basement...

Oh yes, of course Mark, my comments are "boring". Why, because I don't post outrageous claims that are simply retarded such as "Left wingers are traitors" and that the media is somehow at fault for this losing war? Do you even read the drivel that YOU post? This website is a joke, and everyone I have shown it to agrees---including my neo-conservative grandfather who agrees with some of your points but overall thinks you just attack anyone who disagrees with you as wrong and stupid.

Grow up Mark, seriously. Try having an intelligent post, just once, without insulting people who disagree with you. My points are boring? Because their true? Because I proved one of your main supporters, neocon, wrong? Yes, how boring it is to have to do actual work and read through gov documents and whatnot. Or is that exciting to you? The most important research is always boring there chief---that says nothing about the worth of it.

Seriously, I'm waiting for the day when you post one topic that doesn't attack those who disagree with you. Just one, thats all I ask.

And to Freedom1, how much is there to talk about finding a torture manual? What is there to report--the fact it was found, what is in it, where and how it was found, and how it plays into the current situation. That's maybe ten minutes tops. Abu Ghraib...the largest scandal for troops since Vietnam My Lai massacre...why WOULDN'T they talk about it for days on end? How is that not fair? By your logic we should spend as much time on each story as every other one---that is ridiculious, that would result in monthes of reporting on a guy getting hit by a car to be equal to the assassination of a public figure. How does that make even the slightest sense?

You always like talking about the "left wing" media and how they aren't fair---what about the right wing media? You honestly consider Fox news to be fair, even though they cut mics from people during debates, edit footage worse then reality shows do, and constantly criticize anyone who disagrees with them as haters of America? That's fair?

You people need to OPEN YOUR EYES. IRAQ IS LOST!