|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Bill “Shut Up” O’Reilly Takes on Bloggers I’m not in the habit of tuning in Bill O’Reilly or Fox News. However, I may do so tonight because O’Reilly promises to go after “dangerous” bloggers. “Personal attacks lodged through the internet! How are so-called ‘Web logs’ being used as ideological weapons? And who’s behind the smear campaigns? We’ll have a No Spin look at a dangerous new weapon in the culture wars!” declares a Fox News “No Spin Zone” program note. Considering what the Fox News loud-mouth did to Florida professor Sami al-Arian, it is not out of the realm of possibility a blogger or two will be grilled mercilessly after the Fox News loudmouth rants and raves, telling people to “shut up” (see this series of clips in QuickTime) and in general expressing his contempt for the First Amendment. However, I do know of at least one “dangerous” blog O’Reilly can investigate—American Jihad, posted by the would-be serial murderer (or cowardly fantasist) George M Weinert V, who continues to threaten this blogger and others. “CLEAN AND LOAD YOUR GUNS,” screams Weinert. “FIND THE OPERATORS of… radical left wing web sites who are GIVING AID AND COMFORT TO THE ENEMY AND LET THEM FACE A CITIZEN FIRING SQUAD—EXECUTE THE BASTARDS NOW!” Of course, this is not a “radical left wing web site” (unless you consider opposition to an illegal an unconstitutional neocon invasion and criminal occupation of a sovereign nation and the exercise of the First Amendment under Constitution somehow “radical left wing” treason). Mr. Weinert, a self-described Zionist, would like to kill—or have somebody else kill—the following people: Steve Watson, Chris Floyd, Mike Whitney, Juan Cole, Sam Hamod, Lori Price, yours truly, and others. In a normal world, or a non-Bushzarro world, Weinert would be arrested for making death threats, confined for observation in a mental institution, and locked up as a potential menace. But since the “election” of Bush and the hijacking of the government and military by the murderous neocons, such delusional individuals have come out of the woodwork in droves, inspired by the fascistic brown shirt behavior of Bush and crew. Of course, Bill O’Reilly will not “investigate” Weinert and like-minded individuals because he more or less agrees with them—patriots (real patriots, not Fox News and Michael “Savage” Weiner reactionaries) not only need to “shut up” (have their constitutionally guaranteed rights stripped) but should also face charges of sedition (as the former beatnik Michael Weiner would have it) and possibly be sent packing to the gallows. Weinert would circumvent the Star Chamber and kangaroo court entirely and—honoring the loathsome tradition established by Hitler’s brownshirts, or Sturmabteilung—hunt down his enemies and murder them, as fascists are wont to do. Addendum As probably should have been expected, Bill O’Reilly’s “segment” on blogs had almost nothing to do with blogs. Instead, O’Reilly, as a TV personality stuck on himself, concentrated on Media Matters (not a blog but a website) and for an obvious reason—Media Matters often sets the record straight on the distortions and half-truth O’Reilly passes off as truth on his program, both television and radio (O’Reilly’s ego is so big he needs to dominate both mediums in order to get his fix). Moreover, O’Reilly seems to think “smear” blogs (or websites—he is confused) “on the left” are financed by George Soros, the Hungarian-born Jewish-American currency speculator and philanthropist of globalist causes. If this assertion was not ludicrous, it would be comical—Soros, after all, is a former member of the Board of Directors of the Council on Foreign Relations and spends his time engineering color “revolutions” in eastern Europe. Bush neocons hate Soros because he attempted to dethrone their cardboard cut-out president and, as well, he characterized them as “a bunch of extremists guided by a crude form of social Darwinism,” probably the most accurate statement Soros has ever made. David Horowitz’ smear portal (mention of which was strangely absent from O’Reilly’s centimeter deep analysis of blogs that are not blogs) describes Soros as giving “away billions of dollars, much of it to leftwing causes,” such as the Democratic Party, MoveOn.org, America Coming Together (basically an AFL-CIO outfit), the Sierra Club, the Service Employees International Union, and “the feminist political-action committee Emily’s List.” Of course, these organizations are only nominally “leftist” and on the whole the Democratic Party is indistinguishable from the neocon-dominated Republican Party. If anything, Horowitz demonstrates how far over the ideological rainbow his organization and website have gone when he tells us Soros is some kind of dangerous commie. But then, of course, Horowitz’s outing of Soros is part of the game—to blur the fact both left and right are a lot closer in their globalist agenda (disagreeing basically on tactics and who should get the spoils), although they would never admit this. Soros is not a Marxist, as charged—not a traditional anti-capitalist Marxist, anyway, although he is a collectivist, that is to say a member of a collective consisting of a small number of mega-corporations and plutocrats who believe it is their birthright to rule the world and steal unhampered from the rest of humanity. Soros’ vision of globalism only varies by a matter of degree from the globalism envisioned by the neocons. Soros’ neoliberalism (as that of Clinton) puts forth a fake and maudlin compassion (recall Clinton feeling our “pain,” although he didn’t care about the pain endured by millions of Iraqis and Serbs bombed and starved into submission), while the neoliberal vision of the neocons is brutal and overt, a sort of warped and romanticized Machiavellian machismo (the imagined masculinity of the bureaucrat) flaunting itself in ordering soldiers to kill and be killed, leaving behind natural resources to be plundered by the rulers and their select circle of sociopaths and vultures. O’Reilly had as a guest David Kline (Blog!: How the Newest Media Revolution Is Changing Politics, Business, And Culture) who characterized many political bloggers as conspiracy nuts (because they question the official cover story of nine eleven) and a columnist from the American Spectator who dismissed bloggers as vicious children (while the editors and columnists of the American Spectator—a neocon monthly magazine known to take money from the billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and the Bradley Foundation—are the adults). As usual, O’Reilly’s program presented
the false right-left paradigm with “adult” neocons on the
right and liberal “children” (O’Reilly wasted no time
in characterizing them as zombies) on the left. Toward the end of the
seriously lopsided (as usual) “discussion,” O’Reilly
bragged, with now his legendary arrogant swagger, that he does not fear
“bloggers” (he means the people who publish Media Matters)
but instead “loathes” them, making sure to slather that verb
with plenty of emphasis, because they dare to point out his bias on
a regular basis. Of course, no mention was made—in the name of
Fox’s alleged balance and fairness—of the fact the American
Spectator (all grown up and thus not a blog) made its name slandering
Clinton by way of the Arkansas Project. But then Fox, as the official
neocon Ministry of Disinformation, is notorious for only telling one
side of the story. |
