“This site is dedicated to preying on peoples vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”

Sunday, July 27, 2008

The Real Scum is CNN’s Christiane Amanpour



Poligazette

In Amanpour’s twisted universe, calling rioters who happen to be dark skinned ’scum’ is racist. Remember; these children of immigrants were destroying France last year. They were burning down cars and destroying shops on a massive scale. They declared war on the French government and fought against the police. ‘Scum’ is quite an appropriate word for them.

Not because they are dark, but because they are destroying other peoples’ possessions in a violent manner. That’s why.

To Amanpour, however, that doesn’t matter. In her sick politically correct world, one is not allowed to say something negative about people if those people happen to be dark skinned. If they are white, no problem.

What’s even sicker is that she is arguing that Obama and these rioters are the same because the color of their skin happens to be dark.

34 comments:

  1. "The Real Scum is CNN's Christiane Amanpour"

    I couldn't agree more.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Though I can't help but wonder what would happen if she and Trish were locked together in a room. I could tell you what would happen if Christiane Amanpour and I were in that situation, but you already know that.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The burning of the cars has not stopped...

    HUNDREDS are BURNED DAILY...

    2 weeks ago ANOTHER Jewish kids was KIDNAPPED and had his HEAD BASHED in with steel pipes...

    (oh these youths are mis-understood)

    How about these YOUTHS are shot on sight?

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Why McCain’s Meeting With Dalai Lama Should Be Big News

    It says a lot about John McCain that he went out of his way to visit the Tibetan leader — especially when contrasted with his Democratic rival's behavior in Germany.

    July 26, 2008 - by Charlie Martin

    Thursday night, the McCain Campaign announced they were making a — previously unsuspected — side trip from Denver to Aspen in order to let Senator McCain meet with the Dalai Lama. As a member of the World’s Smallest Demographic (Choctaw Indian Buddhist Republicans) it fell to me, at the suggestion of Pajamas Media, to write a piece on it.

    I tried for most of the morning, I really did, and what I got was 200 boring words about how McCain was going to, you know, go to Aspen and meet the Dalai Lama. I could have puffed it out a little longer — who is the Dalai Lama, why does it matter, why was he in Aspen — but frankly, that would have made it a 500 word boring no-news story. After all, McCain has already said he supports Tibetan autonomy and objects to the Chinese policy of suppression and ethnic cleansing. The pool report has come out now, and from it we learn that the Dalai Lama wants McCain to support greater pressure on China, that he presented McCain with a white scarf. (Just as an aside, the pool report says it’s a “sign of hospitality and respect,” but that doesn’t say it, any more than a Rosary blessed by the Pope is just a keepsake of a trip to Rome for a Catholic. It may not mean as much to McCain, but it’s an important thing to a Tibetan Buddhist.) He was also concerned it not be seen as “an endorsement,” and that’s proper as well: he’s not just a spiritual teacher to Buddhists, he’s the head of state of a government in exile.

    But still, what was the news value?

    I submitted the article, and the editors (correctly) rejected it. Hell, I hated the article: why would anyone else want it. It was only later, as was thinking about something else, that it came to me: I was angry. Not at the Pajamas Media editors, but at myself, and at the news cycle. Why wasn’t it news?

    I looked around some of the left-wing blogs, and I was struck by one comment: “Does McCain think the Dalai Lama is a gook?” This because of the infamous statement about how McCain “hates gooks.”

    Well, you know what? If McCain “hated gooks” at some point — after being captured, tortured, beaten, eventually crippled — I think most people would understand that. On the other hand, he has returned to Vietnam on several occasions, and had as much to do with Vietnam and the US reestablishing relations as anyone. Somehow, for all this “hatred,”he’d been on the side of the Vietnamese people since, and even the prison director now says “If I were an American, I’d vote for McCain.”

    So here’s John McCain, who “hates gooks,” going out of his way to visit the head of state and most visible spokesman of the Tibetans. He’d already spoken out in support of them (as had Obama, to be fair.) The visit wouldn’t get a lot of press coverage, really, and the number of new Buddhist votes he was going to get from the visit — literally dozens, no doubt — weren’t going to make a really big difference.

    What it was, what it appeared to be, was an actual sincere visit to the leader of a people who, if they aren’t suffering genocide, are certainly enduring the next best thing. Offering support to people who just wanted to live their own lives.

    Contrast that with Barack Obama, who discovered that the Department of Defense didn’t want him to include campaign aides and a campaign photo-op in a visit to wounded American soldiers and Marines at Landstuhl. (Think of it: what could be lonelier than being severely wounded and in a hospital in a foreign country?) When there wasn’t anything in it for him, what did Obama do? He canceled out, so he could work out at the Ritz-Carlton and do a little Berlin site seeing.

    We Buddhists talk about karuna, the compassion felt by the Buddhas toward all living things: a compassion that grows from understanding, and feeling empathy for them. Who was showing karuna here: Obama? Or McCain?

    That’s why I’m mad. Given the chance to support American soldiers, and no photo op, Obama said, “not worth the trouble.” McCain, given the chance to meet with the leader of millions of oppressed people, goes out of his way, even though the visit is unlikely to win him much goodwill, much less any votes.

    And that’s not news. But it should be.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "I could tell you what would happen if Christiane Amanpour and I were in that situation..."





    "This post has been removed by the author."





    I'm sorry, mat, that was deliciously funny. And here we are, not even locked together in a room.

    ReplyDelete
  7. To begin the day with a declaration of one's fearless directness, and ten minutes later to remove your most pointed, passionate, confrontational statement. Surely you cannot fail to see the humor in it.

    It was, I might add, very diplomatic of you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Fearless declaration? What was fearless about it?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Obama is on CNN speaking to an association of "Journalists of Color". The subject of reparations and apologies for the past came up. The apologies of course, are from people of non-color to people of color.

    Immigration was discussed and Obama is concerned about the family members of those already here. (that could easily be 100 million people).

    Obama pointedly thought and stated that it may be too easy for people like Mick Jagger to get in and too hard for people from Haiti. The Mick Jagger comment was a clever way of saying white.

    People of non-color have become non-people in the ongoing jihad of racialism. Haiti is one of the true shit holes on planet earth. I can tell you that if you could swap out the population of Haiti with the population of Kansas, Haiti would be a tropical paradise in ten years and the "Kansas of color" would look like Zimbabwe.

    ReplyDelete
  10. McCain is questioning Obama's judgment for opposing the Surge, even in retrospect. McCain is claiming that the Surge alone is the cause for the dramatic decrease of violence in Baghdad. But a
    ">map of the demographic shift in the city
    over about a year and a half shows that the real reason is that the Sunni and Shia have segregated themselves into separate warrens. Where there is less contact, there is less friction. Also, the genesis of the "Anbar Awakening" movement actually preceded the Surge and was a backlash to al-Qaeda's sheer brutality against civilians. No doubt the addition of five US brigades helped to quiet things down, but it's not the only factor. In real life things are gray, not black and white.

    (Disclaimer: I am still voting for McCain, even though I'm a "gook" and he said he hates "gooks".)

    ReplyDelete
  11. last time i checked the non-people of color had a civil war to fight slavery and won...

    that war cost the non-people of color many sons and daugthers & treasure...

    So at this point, what would the non-people of color OWE the people of color SINCE they went to WAR and defeated the non-people of color that wished to KEEP SLAVERY...

    A war was fought and won so that people of color should not be enslaved

    dont the people of COLOR owe US a thank you?

    ReplyDelete
  12. "dont the people of COLOR owe US a thank you?"

    When the US sends them back to Africa, perhaps.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Trish,

    I'm still waiting, fearless and diplomatic that I am. And still waiting from the previous thread.

    ReplyDelete
  14. mətušélaḥ said...
    "dont the people of COLOR owe US a thank you?"

    When the US sends them back to Africa, perhaps.

    we did:

    liberia

    Settlers from the United States
    In 1822, the American Colonization Society established Liberia as a place to send freed African-American slaves.[5] African-Americans gradually migrated to the colony and became known as Americo-Liberians, where many present day Liberians trace their ancestry. On July 26, 1847, the Americo-Liberian settlers declared the independence of the Republic of Liberia.
    The settlers regarded Africa as a "Promised Land", but they did not integrate into an African society. Once in Africa, they referred to themselves as "Americans" and were recognized as such by local Africans and by British colonial authorities in neighbouring Sierra Leone. The symbols of their state — its flag, motto, and seal — and the form of government that they chose reflected their American background and diaspora experience. Lincoln University (founded as Ashmun Institute for educating young blacks in Pennsylvania in 1854) played an important role in supplying Americo-Liberians leadership for the new Nation. The first graduating class of Lincoln University, James R. Amos, his brother Thomas H. Amos, and Armistead Miller sailed for Liberia on the brig Mary C. Stevens in April, 1859 after graduation.


    Indigenous Liberian women in 1910.
    The religious practices, social customs and cultural standards of the Americo-Liberians had their roots in the antebellum American South. These ideals strongly influenced the attitudes of the settlers toward the indigenous African people. The new nation, as they perceived it, was coextensive with the settler community and with those Africans who were assimilated into it. Mutual mistrust and hostility between the "Americans" along the coast and the "Natives" of the interior was a recurrent theme in the country's history, along with (usually successful) attempts by the Americo-Liberian minority to dominate what they identified as savage native peoples. They named the land "Liberia," which in the Romance languages, and in Latin in particular, means "Land of the Free," as an homage to their freedom from slavery.


    Joseph Jenkins Roberts, First President of Liberia.
    Historically, Liberia has enjoyed the support and unofficial cooperation of the United States government.[6] Liberia’s government, modeled after that of the United States, was democratic in structure, if not always in substance. After 1877 the True Whig Party monopolized political power in the country, and competition for office was usually contained within the party, whose nomination virtually ensured election. Two problems confronting successive administrations were pressure from neighboring colonial powers, Britain and France, and the threat of financial insolvency, both of which challenged the country’s sovereignty. Liberia retained its independence during the Scramble for Africa, but lost its claim to extensive territories that were annexed by Britain and France. Economic development was hindered by the decline of markets for Liberian goods in the late nineteenth century and by indebtedness on a series of loans, payments on which drained the economy.


    President Edwin Barclay (right) and President Franklin D. Roosevelt during World War II, 1943
    [edit]Significant mid-twentieth century events
    Two events were of particular importance in releasing Liberia from its self-imposed isolation. The first was the grant in 1926 of a large concession to the American-owned Firestone Plantation Company; that move became a first step in the (limited) modernization of the Liberian economy. The second occurred during World War II, when the United States began providing technical and economic assistance that enabled Liberia to make economic progress and introduce social change.

    ReplyDelete
  15. "we did: liberia"

    That was a noble effort. Obviously more of the same is required.

    ReplyDelete
  16. WiO: last time i checked the non-people of color had a civil war to fight slavery and won...

    On the contrary, it is written, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union (Abraham Lincoln, Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862).

    ReplyDelete
  17. Tes,

    Slavery was part of the imperial system. (I would argue it is the imperial system). Abraham Lincoln was a American Nationalist fighting that imperial system. He understood this imperial system perfectly. The quote that you provide only highlights this. In effect, you've only reinforced WiO's point.

    ReplyDelete
  18. On the contrary, it is written, "My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union (Abraham Lincoln, Letter to Horace Greeley, August 22, 1862).


    Others more educated to me have responsed..

    But how I would argue this...

    The North, for what ever evil reasons, fought and beat the South, a group of states attempting to split the union apart that in fact HAD a system of slavery in place.

    If the North destroyed the plantation system and slavery BY WHATEVER MOTIVATION, those of COLOR OWE the North a THANK YOU...

    Did the Allies destroy the Nazis to save the Jews? NO

    But a big FUCKIN THANK YOU to all those AMERICANS for KILLING as many NAZIS as they did...

    See it aint that hard to say thanks...

    ReplyDelete
  19. 2164th: Haiti would be a tropical paradise in ten years and the "Kansas of color" would look like Zimbabwe.

    It already does look like Zimbabwe, in Kansas City, Kansas. I had to stay there for a few weeks to learn to write proprietary code for a tester. I kept driving around looking for the nice areas of town, and there weren't any.

    ReplyDelete
  20. WiO: If the North destroyed the plantation system and slavery BY WHATEVER MOTIVATION, those of COLOR OWE the North a THANK YOU...

    1) There is no more "north" to thank, that was the point of re-uniting the south and the north back into one country.

    2) The war concluded 143 years ago. There's no one left alive to thank.

    3) If coloreds are supposed to thank the descendants of the men in blue who ended slavery, then why aren't the descendants of the men in gray culpable for slavery reparations as well?

    ReplyDelete
  21. teresita said...
    WiO: If the North destroyed the plantation system and slavery BY WHATEVER MOTIVATION, those of COLOR OWE the North a THANK YOU...

    1) There is no more "north" to thank, that was the point of re-uniting the south and the north back into one country.

    IT'S CALLED THE UNION....

    2) The war concluded 143 years ago. There's no one left alive to thank.

    Sure there is... The Federal Government of the United States

    3) If coloreds are supposed to thank the descendants of the men in blue who ended slavery, then why aren't the descendants of the men in gray culpable for slavery reparations as well?

    Cause they LOST the war...

    They were defeated...

    The descendants of the men in gray do not own SLAVES anymore...

    and the POINT being is simple, the Government of the USA owe jack SHIT to ex slaves.....

    ReplyDelete
  22. The other CNN talking head, the Blister did an interview with the Obama

    Obama: Our success in Afghanistan is going to be deeply dependent not just on getting more troops there, which we need, but also some sustained high-level engagement with Pakistan—something that I discussed before but I think is significantly more urgent than even I had imagined. Basically there doesn't appear to be any pressure at all being placed on Al Qaeda, on these training camps, these safe havens, in the FATA [Federally Administered Tribal Areas].

    Man a live, Obama agrees with doug and I, we've been there for years, but welcome aboard Barack.

    Blister:In Iraq, it's not new that Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has wanted to take control of his own country. But there's always been this gap between his assessment of his abilities and American commanders' saying he's not up to it. As president, faced with that difference between what he says he can do and what the commanders say he can do, how would you choose between them?
    Iraq is a sovereign country. Not just according to me, but according to George Bush and John McCain. So ultimately our presence there is at their invitation, and their policy decisions have to be taken into account. I also think that Maliki recognizes that they're going to need our help for some time to come, as our commanders insist, but that the help is of the sort that is consistent with the kind of phased withdrawal that I have promoted. We're going to have to provide them with logistical support, intelligence support. We're going to have to have a very capable counterterrorism strike force. We're going to have to continue to train their Army and police to make them more effective.

    You've been talking about those limited missions for a long time. Having gone there and talked to both diplomatic and military folks, do you have a clearer idea of how big a force you'd need to leave behind to fulfill all those functions?
    Barack: I do think that's entirely conditions-based. It's hard to anticipate where we may be six months from now, or a year from now, or a year and a half from now.


    But of course.
    That is the victory plan, in a nutshell.

    Has been for at least the past two years.

    Mr Maliki declares victory and the US pretty much has to agree. The fact that neither Mr Bush nor McCain had to nerve to admit success, after the aircraft carrier incident, just played into Obama's hands.

    On the Energy Front, mat endorsed T. Boone for VP.

    Seems T.Boone does not want that job, but he does have a reccomendation:

    But it’s not merely the foreign policy consensus that is shifting Obama-ward. The Texas oilman T. Boone Pickens has now joined another high-profile McCain supporter, Arnold Schwarzenegger, in knocking the McCain nostrum that America can drill its way out of its energy crisis. Mr. Pickens, who financed the Swift-boat campaign smearing John Kerry in 2004, was thought to be a sugar daddy for similar assaults against the Democrats this year.
    Instead, he is underwriting nonpartisan ads promoting wind power and speaks of how he would welcome Al Gore as energy czar if there’s an Obama administration.


    That puts rufus and mat in the Obama energy independence camp.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Keeps falling further behind.
    At least you can't a accuse him of flopping out of any of his losing positions.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "That puts rufus and mat in the Obama energy independence camp."


    No.

    Energy independence is not an Obama exclusive. McCain might be a little slow in fully understanding all the options, but he'll get there. I'm sure of it.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I can't stand that bitch either.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Do You interesting how to [b]Buy Viagra in Canada[/b]? You can find below...
    [size=10]>>>[url=http://listita.info/go.php?sid=1][b]Buy Viagra in Canada[/b][/url]<<<[/size]

    [URL=http://imgwebsearch.com/30269/link/buy%20viagra/1_valentine3.html][IMG]http://imgwebsearch.com/30269/img0/buy%20viagra/1_valentine3.png[/IMG][/URL]
    [URL=http://imgwebsearch.com/30269/link/buy%20viagra/3_headsex1.html][IMG]http://imgwebsearch.com/30269/img0/buy%20viagra/3_headsex1.png[/IMG][/URL]
    [b]Bonus Policy[/b]
    Order 3 or more products and get free Regular Airmail shipping!
    Free Regular Airmail shipping for orders starting with $200.00!

    Free insurance (guaranteed reshipment if delivery failed) for orders starting with $300.00!
    [b]Description[/b]

    Generic Viagra (sildenafil citrate; brand names include: Aphrodil / Edegra / Erasmo / Penegra / Revatio / Supra / Zwagra) is an effective treatment for erectile dysfunction regardless of the cause or duration of the problem or the age of the patient.
    Sildenafil Citrate is the active ingredient used to treat erectile dysfunction (impotence) in men. It can help men who have erectile dysfunction get and sustain an erection when they are sexually excited.
    Generic Viagra is manufactured in accordance with World Health Organization standards and guidelines (WHO-GMP). Also you can find on our sites.
    Generic Viagra is made with thorough reverse engineering for the sildenafil citrate molecule - a totally different process of making sildenafil and its reaction. That is why it takes effect in 15 minutes compared to other drugs which take 30-40 minutes to take effect.
    [b][/b]
    Even in the most sexually liberated and self-satisfied of nations, many people still yearn to burn more, to feel ready for bedding no matter what the clock says and to desire their partner of 23 years as much as they did when their love was brand new.
    The market is saturated with books on how to revive a flagging libido or spice up monotonous sex, and sex therapists say “lack of desire” is one of the most common complaints they hear from patients, particularly women.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Hey Selma, LOL :D

    -Yours,
    Jorge

    ReplyDelete