I mean I understand anger and speaking truth to power, in fact, I encourage it; but we really have to be careful how we go about acting out our displeasure with our government.
"A right wing nitwit by the name of Chris Crockett, a resident of Pennsylvania, really does not like President Obama. This NRA acolyte and Phil Robertson supporter took to the interwebs to vent his frustrations with the President in an intelligent and well-informed discussion of the issues–just kidding! He wants that “Muslim” dead.
Apparently, Mr. Crockett is lonely and enjoys visits from men in suits, because he chose to join the ranks of Everest Wilhelmsen in his open expressions that President Obama (and his entire family) should cease to exist. Like Hank the Handyman, Crockett asked for someone in the world to “plz shoot that f**king n*gger president…”
Like all racists, Crockett preceded his use of the n-word with an explanation that he is “not racist.” If that’s not enough, he extends his wonderful suggestion that “he should be killed” to include President Obama’s children and “the rest of him (sic) Muslim Family.”
[Source]
Oh my! No love for his O ness I see. Hey, dude is entitled to question his government and the policies of the guy calling the shots, he and his fellow travelers can even do disgusting things like this , but my man has to be smart enough to keep the guys in the black suits off of his doorstep. This is not how you do it.
Finally, speaking of "right wing nitwits", I have another story that you will not be seeing on FOX News, Drudge, Breitbart, or any of their news outlets anytime soon.
Apparently they had a lot if it wrong.
"There are a lot of interesting details in the article, but two points are important to note:
- Islamist groups did indeed use that anti-Muslim video as a rallying point to launch the initial attack.
- There's no evidence that Al Qaeda or any other international terrorist organization was involved, and no evidence of meticulous planning.
Months of investigation by The New York Times, centered on extensive interviews with Libyans in Benghazi who had direct knowledge of the attack there and its context, turned up no evidence that Al Qaeda or other international terrorist groups had any role in the assault. The attack was led, instead, by fighters who had benefited directly from NATO’s extensive air power and logistics support during the uprising against Colonel Qaddafi. And contrary to claims by some members of Congress, it was fueled in large part by anger at an American-made video denigrating Islam.There’s much more to this multi-part article, and you should, as always, read the whole thing. But it shows unequivocally that the reality in Libya is far more complex and murky than the simplistic anti-Obama talking points pushed relentlessly by the right."
A fuller accounting of the attacks suggests lessons for the United States that go well beyond Libya. It shows the risks of expecting American aid in a time of desperation to buy durable loyalty, and the difficulty of discerning friends from allies of convenience in a culture shaped by decades of anti-Western sentiment. Both are challenges now hanging over the American involvement in Syria’s civil conflict.
That's an outline of the article. Read the actual New York Times investigative report, here.
*Top pic from thewire.com
0 Comments