Tuesday, October 24, 2006

JonQ's Email to "60 Minutes" re Pelosi Puff Piece


After seeing the incredibly shallow, biased puff-piece that "60 Minutes" ran on Pelosi last Sunday, I sent them the following email:


To: CBS "60 Minutes"

From: Jon Quixote

Re: The Pelosi profile, "Two Heartbeats Away," October 22, 2006

I am an avid 60 Minutes watcher. You have done some superb work through the years.

But the Pelosi thing was nothing more than a one-sided puff piece.

Please don't confuse being critical of her surface stuff (her rabid hypocrisy re her ability to bring "civility" to DC, while savaging Bush via her verbal vitriol) for substance. It isn't.

Here's some items of vital importance to the American people that 60 Minutes producers, and Leslie Stahl, either knew, or should have known, but didn't touch on in any of that 12 minute segment:

(From "Do As I Say, Not As I Do," the expose' of leftist hypocrisy and corruption):

- Pelosi proclaims her support for unions, yet the luxury resort, the vineyard and the restaurants she partly owns are strictly non-union

- While she advocates tough new laws enforcing environmental regulations on the private sector, the exclusive country club she partly owns failed to comply with existing environmental regulations for the past eight years – including a failure to protect endangered species
Furthermore, let's just imagine, for a moment, that Pelosi was applying for a job - or a promotion, because her superiors were (apparently) dissatisfied with the person currently in that position. Fine.

One of the first questions she'd be asked is, "What would you do differently?"

And the voters have every reason to ask that of her - but they trust the mainstream press to ask it, on their behalf.

That question was not asked last night. And given the following, it SHOULD HAVE been asked:

(Source: "Pelosi Says Key To Beating GOP Is To 'Pull Them Down," USA Today, July 31, 2006)

"The highly-paid Democratic consultants that Pelosi hired told her, 'To get the chance to (take control of Congress), Pelosi said, Democrats hatched a plan shortly after President Bush won re-election in 2004 to wage a campaign to bring down Republicans.' They asked a group of marketers: 'If you are No. 2 and want to be No. 1, what do you do?'

"Pelosi said the marketers told Democrats that they 'could not overtake the leader by just saying you have a good product. You have to pull them down first'."
Did you catch that? They expect, under Pelosi's leadership, to not even discuss what they'd do differently, or better. Their ENTIRE strategy is, and has been, to "bring the Republicans down."

THIS is "civility?"

THIS is enough to qualify her and her colleagues for a "promotion" - through the smears and propaganda they've been engaged in?

WHERE was the follow-up on the disclosure by various news organizations that Democratic operatives were "shopping" the Foley emails and IMs to the news media earlier this year - instead of turning them over to the FBI, as any responsible person would have done, to "protect innocent children"?

Do you see what I am referring to, now?

I'd appreciate a substantive response.



Waiting breathlessly for that response.

And by the way, did you notice how Pelosi's face, in these photos (all from 2006) changes? Hm.... well, we'll leave that to someone more qualified than me to comment on it... (say, a Beverly Hills plastic surgeon?).


Sunday, October 22, 2006

NY Times & BBC: Surrendering To Jihad --- Again, and Again, and Again...


THE NEW YORK TIMES, Part 1: "A" isn't "A" if we refuse to call it "A"

"All The News That's Fit To Print" has been the motto of The New York Times since its inception.

But "fit" --- as defined by, and according to whom?
Apparently, according to the powers that believe it is a cardinal sin to clearly identify and apply rational standards to jihadists, and their appeasers and exponents --- primarily in the form of the young Muslims they've brainwashed.
Case in point: The front page of the Saturday, October 21, 2006 issue sports a huge above-the-fold picture of an outdoor photo exhibit in France, depicting the larger-than-life faces of three young Muslims.

The cover story that it accentuates, "Anger Festering in French Areas Scarred in Riots," describes this picture as "A photo exhibit of young people (that) tries to counter stereotypes in the Paris suburb of Clichy-sous-Bois, where riots broke out a year ago."

(THIS is how French dhimmis attempt to "counter stereotypes" of Muslim terrorists in their midst --- by depicting them in their unrestrained, hysterical facial rage?)

The story obviously refers to the intifada that young Muslims instigated in France over the past 12 months, which was, itself, part of a global jihadist war against Western values and cultures.

Yet in this entire 1,600-word article, how many times were the words "Muslim," or "Islam," or "Islamist," or "jihad," used?

ZERO. Not a SINGLE time.

Instead, they are referred to as "the offspring of Arab and African immigrants."

Gosh, does that mean they could be Christians, or Buddhists, or Hindus... or atheists? Or anything BUT Muslims?

Thankfully, the Fox News Channel is actually covering this story:

French Police Face Attacks by Growing 'Intifada'

Key excerpts:

In France, a high school teacher received death threats, forcing him into hiding, after he wrote a newspaper editorial in September saying Muslim fundamentalists are trying to muzzle Europe's democratic liberties. Ethnic integration and violence against police are both becoming issues in the campaign for the French presidency. Interior Minister Nicolas Sarkozy, the leading contender on the right, said this month that those who do not love France do not have to stay, echoing a longtime slogan of the extreme-right National Front: "France, love it or leave it."

Michel Thooris, head of the small Action Police union, claims that the new violence is taking on an Islamic fundamentalist tinge. "Many youths, many arsonists, many vandals behind the violence do it to cries of 'Allah Akbar' (God is Great) when our police cars are stoned," he said in an interview. Larger, more mainstream police unions sharply disagree that the suburban unrest has any religious basis. However, they do say that some youth gangs no longer seem content to throw stones or torch cars and instead appear determined to hurt police officers — or worse."First, it was a rock here or there. Then it was rocks by the dozen. Now, they're leading operations of an almost military sort to trap us," said Loic Lecouplier, a police union official in the Seine-Saint-Denis region north of Paris. "These are acts of war."

I wonder when this story is going to be included in our network TV nightly news roundup???

Graphic showing the locations throughout France where Muslims were rioting,
burning cars and property, attacking police officers and others ---
leading to some to rename the nation "Francistan"


THE NEW YORK TIMES, Part 2: Let's Bribe Jihadists, for Peace!!!

In the same issue of the Times appears an editorial by Paul Cruickshank (a fellow at the Center on Law and Security at New York University School of Law), entitled Covered Faces, Open Rebellion, regarding the recent dust-up over a British Muslim's suit against the school she teaches at, for not permitting her to teach while wearing a full-facial veil, called a "niqab."

Like France, Britain has all but bent over and grabbed its ankles in order to not be impolite to the Muslims that it accepts into its culture, many of whom scream for its submission to Islam. According to Cruickshank:

"In a recent poll, more than a quarter of British Muslims under the age of 24 said that the July 7, 2005, attacks on the London Underground were justified because of British foreign policy. Thousands of young British Muslims have been influenced by fundamentalist organizations like Hizb ut-Tahrir and militant groups like Al Muhajiroun."

And what is the solution that Cruickshank proposes, to address ths shocking statistic, and the phenomena of jihadist Muslims using violence, terror and intimidation to advance Islam, and force Britain and France into even greater roles of dhimmitude!?

"Calls by British politicians for Muslim women to stop wearing the niqab will only enhance the political symbolism of this act and make its practice more widespread. Instead, what is needed is an ambitious program to address the core grievances of Britain’s young Muslims, for example by creating economic opportunities and tackling discrimination.

Britain’s young Muslims need to be brought into the country’s political process. More Muslims should be encouraged and selected to run for Parliament and to aspire to high office. It will then be much harder for radicals to claim that the British government is at war with Islam. And then we will start seeing far fewer young Muslim women fully veiled."

THIS is the solution?

Thank goodness Cruickshank wasn't around when we went to war against the Nazis; he would have encouraged us to elect Nazis to governmental positions from local dog catcher to the House and Senate, so they would feel more welcome in our culture, and couldn't claim with such ease that we're at war with Nazi Germany --- just with Hitler and his henchmen.

How could Cruickshank, with all his education and experience, be unaware that part of the jihadists' strategy for taking over our culture is to do precisely what he is suggesting!? To inspire hatred and division where there was none before, then claim victimhood, then do whatever is necessary to obtain progressively greater power in said culture?

The Jews, Russians, Italians, Poles, Asians and others who came to America in the last century often possessed nothing but the clothes on their backs --- and a desire to create better lives for themselves and their children. They didn't riot in the streets for welfare handouts, or torch buildings and cars over perceived grievances, or attempt to murder police officers.

Most considered handouts to be an insult; they wanted to be self-sufficient, to the greatest degree humanly possible. They went to work, became educated, and made themselves desirable as workers, neighbors and friends. And in doing so, they became free, valued and important contributors to the mosaic that is the American "melting pot."

When is the last time you heard of a concerted Muslim effort to advance (non-weaponry) science --- or medicine --- or agriculture --- or anything constructive? How many Muslims have applied themselves, personally, to creating genuine peace (not as a result of intimidating spineless politicians and cultures into dhimmitude)?

Yeah. Me either.

And yet, the New York Times apparently sees absolutely nothing wrong with either article.
Somewhere, Osama bin Laden must be laughing his ass off, at the ease with which the Times and other MSM organizations have decided to be so helpful to the advance of jihad.


THE BBC: Finally Admitting Its Anti-Western Bias

Also on October 21, an article appeared in the London Evening Standard that, like earlier articles from other sources, revealed just how biased the esteemed BBC actually is. And the source is... the BBC itself.

Here are some key excerpts from the article, entiled "We Are Biased, Admit The Stars Of BBC News" ---
A leaked account of an 'impartiality summit' called by BBC chairman Michael Grade, is certain to lead to a new row about the BBC and its reporting on key issues, especially concerning Muslims and the war on terror. It reveals that executives would let the Bible be thrown into a dustbin on a TV comedy show, but not the Koran, and that they would broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden if given the opportunity. Further, it discloses that the BBC's 'diversity tsar' wants Muslim women newsreaders to be allowed to wear veils when on air.

In one of a series of discussions, executives were asked to rule on how they would react if the controversial comedian Sacha Baron Cohen, known for his offensive characters Ali G and Borat - was a guest on the programme Room 101. On the show, celebrities are invited to throw their pet hates into a dustbin and it was imagined that Baron Cohen chose some kosher food, the Archbishop of Canterbury, a Bible and the Koran. Nearly everyone at the summit, including the show's actual producer and the BBC's head of drama, Alan Yentob, agreed they could all be thrown into the bin, except the Koran for fear of offending Muslims.

Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct' it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'.

Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.' Randall also told how he once wore Union Jack cufflinks to work but was rebuked with: 'You can't do that, that's like the National Front!'
And this is how they propose to preserve their own culture against the jihadist onslaught? This is how they propose to fight, and win, the war on jihadist terror?

This is dhimmitude personified, with a British accent.

© Copyright 2006 by Jon Quixote. All rights reserved. Interested in publishing this item? Contact me at jonquix@hotmail.com for information.


Thursday, October 19, 2006

Secret email from Al Quada to the DNC - REVEALED!!!


One would think that with the speed at which information travels on the Internet, the Democratic National Committee would have investigated how I keep getting copies of their secret emails forwarded to me (here, here, and here). But alas, I guess they're just too busy these days, spreading hate, divisiveness, and America-bashing, jihad-appeasing, UN-worshipping, multi-cultural propaganda and lies, during this final push before the mid-term elections.

Oh well. Another one ended up in my email box this morning... and this one is especially troublesome, as it comes directly from al Quada itself.

From: Ayman al Zawahiri <

To: Howlin' Howie Dean <

Subject: THANK YOU; Keep it up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Date: Thursday, 19 Oct 2006 07:40:25 -0400

Dear Dr. Dean:

As I said in 2005, al Quada’s war against America is not primarily a military battle, but rather, a conflict in which the public’s perceptions, and the information they are fed, will determine the outcome.

We originally planned to exert major effort to influence American public opinion through the inroads that our funders had already made into American colleges, schools and newsrooms.

But thanks to the Democratic National Committee and allied organizations, such as MoveOn.org, Code Pink, Not In Our Name, The World Can’t Wait, and Scholars for 9/11 Truth, it turns out the American left has been a vital, dominant factor in breaking their fellow citizens’ will to fight, and win, the war that we have instigated against you.

- You proclaimed that this war is one that America’s soldiers “cannot win”

- Senator Kerry likened your soldiers to “terrorists”

- Senator Durbin compared U.S. soldiers to “Nazis”

- Cindy Sheehan denounced America’s military, while affirming the truth that our brother mujahadeen are “freedom fighters”

- Thanks to our influence in your schools, many of America’s young people have become convinced that no culture is better or worse than any other; that all are merely “different,” each entitled to respect and sovereignty

- Thanks to our influence in your newsrooms, a sizable portion of Americans now believe that our 9/11 attacks were actually perpetrated by your government – and that President Bush’s push for retaliatory military action was merely an effort to enrich his friends in the oil industry

- Thanks to our influence in America’s arts, many actors, musicians and critics have advanced and affirmed our position that America is a malevolent force in the world, seeking nothing less than world domination through its military power

Most recently, several of your news organizations reported that President Bush likened America’s conflict in Iraq to its experiences in Vietnam. (But of course, thanks to the American left’s domination of schools and school-related materials, the vast majority of your schoolchildren have no idea how hamstrung your military forces were in Vietnam, not by their own limitations, but by political maneuvering.)

They also have no idea how close your soldiers were, in reality, to crushing the North Vietnamese (even they acknowledged this, years after the war). No, the North Vietnamese acknowledged that their primary war was against America’s will to fight – and that once that battle was won, they were able to force the U.S. out of the south. Had the U.S. stayed, and fought the way the military wanted to, the North Vietnamese admitted that the war would have been won by America.

Now, on the cusp of your mid-term elections, we pray to Allah, The Merciful and Wise, that Americans will elect a majority of Democrats to your House of Representatives and Senate, so that your retreat from Iraq and Afghanistan can commence. Once America surrenders these battlefields to us, perhaps we can then help to facilitate America’s withdrawl from other aspects of its war against our mujahadeen, and accept the fact that we are on the march, and will not stop until we have converted – or slain – more and more western infidels.

Yes, Dr. Dean, you were right – America’s battle against al Quada and our brother mujahadeen is one that it cannot win.

Speaking as one physician to another, I congratulate your correctly ‘diagnosing’ the problem – America’s will to fight – and the remedy: actively subverting America’s view of itself as a force for good, and one that stands on the forefront of the battle against us.

America’s military cannot be defeated by any known force. But through Allah, blessed be His Name, we will continue to win our war against America, thanks to the efforts of wise and courageous infidels like you, and your fellow Democrats.

Please know that I and my brother mujahadeen will be praying for your strength and focus in these last weeks of your mid-term campaign season.

Ayman al Zawahiri, M.D.
Al Quada #2

P.S. I really liked your idea about running an Ahmedinejad-Chavez ticket for the U.S. presidential race in 2008. Allah knows, none of the Democrats you were considering will stand on principle - any principle. Good luck!!!

© Copyright 2006 by Jon Quixote. All rights reserved. Interested in publishing this item? Contact me at jonquix@hotmail.com for information.