The View’s Whoopi Goldberg on Polanski ‘It Wasn’t RAPE-Rape’

Whoopi defends Roman Polanski’s raping of a 13 year old saying it “wasn’t rape rape.” Polanski was initially charged at age 44 with rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, lewd and lascivious act upon a child under 14, and furnishing a controlled substance (methaqualone) to a minor. But according to Whoopi, it isn’t “rape, rape.”

Also see: Progressivism in a nutshell: Whoopi explains statutory rape of a drugged 13-yr old isn’t the same as RAPE-rape. (What?!)

 

Yet another Obama indoctrination video of kids from Sand Hill Elementary School in Asheville, NC

Your tax payer dollars at work making sure children are pre-programmed to worship Obama.

Pictures that prove “Truthers” are full of Male Bovine Droppings

     Once again, my thanks to FHK reader Jack Stone for pointing me in the direction of this Web site.

     The first picture at this link  shows us the wheel hub from Flight 77 at the Pentagon.  “Truthers” hate this photo because it proves they’re lying about no visible debris seen at the Pentagon. Furthermore, as we see here, Dylan Avery, producer of Loose Change, compares the wheel hub of a 757 to the landing gear (in the 1^st edition, anyway). Here’s a helpful hint:  The wheel hub is only PART of the landing gear.

            Internet Detectives  also provides a picture of the wheel hub from a 757 and a 757’s landing gear- oh, and they used the EXACT SAME PICTURES THAT AVERY USED!!!

     Dylan Avery also needs a math lesson, as the “logic” he uses to “prove” it was a military plane is that the landing gear had a larger radius to width ratio (source ). Any geometry book will tell you that ALL circular objects have a diameter that is double the radius.

     The 2^nd picture at this site  “truthers” hate is the one showing the debris from the towers, specifically the north tower, hitting WTC 7.  Conspiracy theorists claim that the fire and debris could not have reached WTC and caused severe damage.  However, as we see from the 2^nd picture at the aforementioned site, the debris cloud is, in point of fact, slamming into WTC 7, which is the brown building at the bottom-right hand corner.

      The 3^rd picture CT’s hate, found here, is the one showing WTC 6 was SEVERELY damaged.  

     The reason “ truthers” hate this one is because they claim WTC 6, which was between the towers and WTC 7- only had minimal damage. However, they clearly need to take a closer look at the 3^rd picture at this site: WTC 1 is on the middle- right, WTC 5 is on the top-middle, WTC 7 is slightly above the middle-left, and WTC 6 is between WTC 1 and 7.  Notice that the center of WTC 6 is gone, having collapsed.

     The 4^th and 5^th picture this site  provides are those of the SEVERE AND INTENSE fires that were clearly burning across a LARGE portion of the WTC.  You will note from said pictures that there is a lot of smoke and you can see the orange flames as well.

     The 6^th photo conspiracy nuts hate, found here, is that of the plume of smoke from the crash of Flight 93, taken by a Mrs. McClatchey from her front porch.  This site  further points out that “truthers” have harassed and threatened her, which is a typical tactic of those who know they’ve been caught lying but don’t want to admit it-  it also shows that “truthers” are nothing more than bullies, and therefore cowards. Oh, and before “truthers” claim that an engine was found 8 miles away from a nearby lake, as a History Channel special last August pointed out, those are the DRIVING DIRECTIONS from MapQuest.  Hint: PLANES DON’T USE ROADS- the actual distance between the lake and the crash site is only THREE miles.

     The 7^th photo that “truthers” hate, found at this site  is that of a seatbelt from Flight 93.   All the wreckage, which accounts for the WHOLE plane, with the exception of the black box, has been returned to the airlines, yet “truthers” claim all of the local residents airline workers, local police and emergency services, coroners, and air safety experts involved in the operation to recover the aircraft were in on it ( source ). Good luck getting that many people to maintain their silence-  you have a better chance of winning the lottery.

     Picture number 8 that “truthers hate, from here, is the one of the sagging floors in WTC 2.  The increase of heat cause the steel to weaken-  notice, that’s weaken, NOT melt- resulting in the buckling of the towers, the bowing of columns, and the eventual collapse.  However, “truthers” still insist it was brought down by explosives, while ignoring the fact that, due to the chemical composition of explosives, there’s NO POSSIBLE WAY they could have survived the impact and fires ( source ). Before some “truther” brings up the thermite/thermate lie,  thermate/thermite is NOT an explosive, it’s an INCENDIARY.

            The 9^th photo that drives “truthers” nuts, located here  is that of workmen using cutting torches to cut up the beams AFTER THE COLLAPSE.  This is what “truthers” use in an effort to “prove” their “thermitic material” claim, while ignoring the fact that thermite is NEVER used in demolitions, only for cutting and welding ( source ).

     Last but not least, the 10^th photo “truthers hate, found at this site, is that of the debris OUT-PACING the collapse.

     “Truthers” often claim the towers fell at free-fall speeds or faster than free-fall speeds ( reference ).  Falling faster than free-fall, without assistance, is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE. The only way the towers could have fallen faster than free-fall speeds is if rocket engines had been attached to them.

     Furthermore, as this site points out, since the debris is clearly falling FASTER than the collapse, the collapse occurred well under free-fall speeds.

Should you post your childrens’ photos online?

There’s a lot of information available on teaching your kids to be safe online, but one aspect of child safety online that seems to seldom be addressed is the behavior of the parents.

Lately, I have been noticing an increasing number of parents who seem to have no qualms about posting their kids’ photos on the social networks. Some even use a child’s photo in place of their own for their profile avatar. This, to me, seems about as safe (not!) as bumper stickers I’ve seen which list the name of each child on the back of the family minivan. I mean, any child predator that might be on the network instantly has your child’s first and last name, and a good idea of where they live…in some cases, even a link to contact them through their own social networking profile. I did some research on this, and the good news is that it seems that my fears on this might be a bit somewhat overblown. I wasn’t able to locate examples of child predators locating victims in this manner. At least not yet. Right now, kids are too easy to locate through their own online activities.

There are examples of people, however, using family photos indiscriminately. Recently, a mother discovered that an international adoption scam outfit used a photo she posted of her child on her personal family blog as a photo of a child that was supposedly up for adoption. Thankfully, the scammers were “only” after money, and the child was never in any phsical danger, but the mother was quite understandably very upset.

Not being a parent myself and not an expert on this topic of any sort, I won’t presume to tell parents how or where they should and shouldn’t post their kids photos. I do think it’s important, however, to remind all of us to follow common-sense safety in posting any photos online. We do not have control over how they will be used.

I can speak from experience on my impression of parents who use their kids’ photos for their own profile avatars. This makes me uncomfortable. I sometimes can’t tell whether the photo is a childhood photo of my new online friend, or if it’s a photo of his/her child. And things really get bizarre when the child is the opposite gender. I’m very careful about not interacting with young children online, because I have no way of knowing whether they have their parents’ permission to be talking with me, or if their parents would even approve. So, when I see an avatar of a child, I then have to do additional research just to make sure I’m actually talking to an adult. I completely understand why the adult would not be comfortable posting his/her own photo as an avatar (I often don’t post mine). But I can’t help wondering if someone is not comfortable posting his own photo, why on earth would he be comfortable posting his child’s photo? But that’s just me.

In most cases, I’m sure folks are just so darned proud of their kids they can’t resist the urge to show them off. That’s understandable, but it’s important to really think about who is viewing that photo, about the fact that once it’s online, you have no control over how it will be used.

Oh, and whatever you do, don’t assume it’s OK to post photos of your friends’ children online. This mother is an example of someone who has pretty strong feelings about that.

Poll: Americans Concerned About Big Government

At 57%, the number of Americans who say the government is doing too many things that should be left to individuals and businesses is at a 10-year high.

 

Activists Pray To Obama

People are now praying to Obama! Don’t miss the reference to the “prophet” Jeremiah (Wright) at 32 seconds and the “prophet” Martin Luther King Jr at 50 seconds.

“The People” are Winning…

Bob of YouTube fame gets passionate about the power “the people” have had in the last couple of months. “Keep fighting people!! We’re winning!!!” is his call to us all. If you want to listen to someone passionate, then listen to Bob.

 

Israeli Minister Barak Facing Arrest in England British Lawyers Try to Have Israel’s Minister of Defense Arrested as a War Criminal

Really, guys, you can’t be serious.

I am afraid they are maliciously, purposively serious. The noose continues to tighten around the collective Jewish neck, just as I feared it would.

The United Nations just listened to Qaddafi speak—Amadinejad too: they honored these terrorists, monsters, menaces to decent people everywhere, beginning with their own people. The monsters came, they left, and neither assassin nor legal eagle sent them on a way-way trip to Hell or to the Hague.

But British lawyers, acting on behalf of 16 Palestinians, just tried to have Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak arrested for his alleged “war crimes” and “crimes against humanity” in Gaza—partly based on their interpretation of the infamous Goldstone Report. How Goldstone could have lent his good name to this treacherous, ignoble document is slightly above my pay grade; only God can judge him now.

Earlier today, Anne Bayefsky referred to the Goldstone Report as a blood libel, quite equivalent to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I totally agree with her…Continue reading on Chesler Chronicles >>

 

Tolerance=Racism: Newspeak vs TruthSpeak about FGM

It is one thing to rail against human rights violations on foreign soil. It is quite another to countenance such violations in one’s own Western backyard.

As we know, Europe has allowed immigrant practices to flourish under the rubric of “tolerance” and “multi-cultural sensitivity.” In my view, such “tolerance” is actually racist, not anti-racist as it presumes itself to be; inhumane and cruel, certainly not compassionate.

At the G8 conference about Violence Against Women in Rome, which I attended earlier this month, a stellar panel on female genital mutilation took place.

Dr. Elham Manea, an Yemeni-Swiss, challenged the western culturally relativist view which leads to “tolerance” for what are, after all, crimes against women and against humanity. And, she said, what they really represent is “human rights for westerners only,” and not for anyone else. “Women and girls are the first to suffer from such ‘tolerance.’”

Continue reading on Chesler Chronicles >>

 

No Stone Left Unturned

…and you’re certain there won’t be any of ..them buried here?

 

For more fun, visit www.DiversityLane.com

 

MajorityConnections: Turn Casual Supporters into Engaged Activists

Jessica, of MajorityConnections, writes:

…One of the most frequent comments I hear from activists is that they don’t understand why they need Facebook, Twitter, Ning, or any other social networking site and yet they can’t seem to get their groups off the ground. A similar lament is that while finding supporters isn’t a problem, getting them to stick around and become part of the organization is. When the success of your group depends on member engagement, fundraising, and spreading a certain message, it’s important that your internet presence give members and potential activists as many avenues for acting as possible.

If you find that your organization has plenty of support, but you’re having trouble transforming your support into action, there’s a good chance your group hasn’t fully embraced Web 2.0. Embracing Web 2.0 means not just creating dynamic websites where information is readily available, but creating campaigns where your activist base can easily interact with the provided information.

You should approach your new media strategy with two overall goals in mind:

• Goal 1: Provide good and timely information
• Goal 2: Create easy methods for engagement

To reach your broad goals of providing good information and making it easy to share that information, your web strategy has to begin with your website and branch out from there….Read the entire report on MajorityConnections >>

 

Progressivism in a nutshell: Whoopi explains statutory rape of a drugged 13-yr old isn’t the same as RAPE-rape. (What?!)

I don’t watch The View, and haven’t for years. The only time I see clips of it is when the “ladies” say something so asinine that the media or another blogger reports on it. This is one of those times. Hat-tip to Ed Morrissey on HotAir for this unbelievable reflection of our modern society.

Just for the record, I do understand the difference between “statutory rape” and “rape-rape.” A good (hypothetical) example of a time when “statutory rape” might be handled differently than “rape-rape” would be when an 18-year old boy gets caught in a parked car with his 17-year old girlfriend, who is obviously not being coerced into anything she didn’t want to do. Is this illegal? Yes. Is it wrong? Yes. Should he go to prison for the rest of his life? Her parents might think so, but this situation is clearly different from the one we’re dealing with in the Roman Polanski situation.

In this clip, Whoopi Goldberg explains that “the world” doesn’t view what Roman Polanski did as rape-rape. I’m thankful to be living in a country that still recognizes that a grown man drugging a 13-yr old girl and sodomizing her is “rape,” and should be punished as such.

 

New York Times Says the Darnedest Things, Regarding ACORN, Van Jones, and so on and so forth

What do you make of this? Yes, it is humorous, but, I don’t think that was the main effect they were going for, over at Marxstream Media, Manhattan.

THE PUBLIC EDITOR
Tuning In Too Late

By CLARK HOYT

Published: September 26, 2009

ON Sept. 12, an Associated Press article inside The Times reported that the Census Bureau had severed its ties to Acorn, [sic, ACORN] the community organizing group. Robert Groves, the census director, was quoted as saying that Acorn, one of thousands of unpaid organizations promoting the 2010 census, had become “a distraction.”

What the article didn’t say — but what followers of Fox News and conservative commentators already knew — was that a video sting had caught Acorn workers counseling a bogus prostitute and pimp on how to set up a brothel staffed by under-age girls, avoid detection and cheat on taxes. The young woman in streetwalker’s clothes and her companion were actually undercover conservative activists with a hidden camera.

It was an intriguing story: employees of a controversial outfit, long criticized by Republicans as corrupt, appearing to engage in outrageous, if not illegal, behavior. An Acorn worker in Baltimore was shown telling the “prostitute” that she could describe herself to tax authorities as an “independent artist” and claim 15-year-old prostitutes, supposedly illegal immigrants, as dependents.

But for days, as more videos were posted and government authorities rushed to distance themselves from Acorn, The Times stood still. Its slow reflexes — closely following its slow response to a controversy that forced the resignation of Van Jones, a White House adviser — suggested that it has trouble dealing with stories arising from the polemical world of talk radio, cable television and partisan blogs. Some stories, lacking facts, never catch fire. But others do, and a newspaper like The Times needs to be alert to them or wind up looking clueless or, worse, partisan itself.

Some editors told me they were not immediately aware of the Acorn videos on Fox, YouTube and a new conservative Web site called BigGovernment.com. When the Senate voted to cut off all federal funds to Acorn, there was not a word in the newspaper, although a report in the Caucus blog that day covered the action. When the New York City Council froze all its funding for Acorn and the Brooklyn district attorney opened a criminal investigation, there was still nothing.

Readers noticed. James Jeff Crocket of New Britain, Conn., spoke for many when he said he was sure he knew why the paper was silent: “protecting the progressive movement.”

The piece goes on, tip-toeing an imaginary line between confession and denial, apology and excuse. This, particularly, brings a lasting smile:

Jill Abramson, the managing editor for news, agreed with me that the paper was “slow off the mark,” and blamed “insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues that are dominating Fox News and talk radio.” She and Bill Keller, the executive editor, said last week that they would now assign an editor to monitor opinion media and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies. Keller declined to identify the editor, saying he wanted to spare that person “a bombardment of e-mails and excoriation in the blogosphere.”

Despite what the critics think, Abramson said the problem was not liberal bias.

Liberal bias? Naaaa. The solution to the not really bias? Let us see that again: “…assign an editor to monitor opinion media and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies.” The “controversies” of “opinion media?” Is that what you call journalism, from those pesky Americans who happen to believe government should abide by the Constitution, Mr. Hoyt? And, do you really purport, your comrades are so Old World that they fail to heed any particular kinds of new, er… “opinion media?”

Here is how it closes. (Still grinning and shaking my head, as fingers move on the keyboard.)

But Rosenstiel said The Times has a particular problem with conservatives, especially after its article last year suggesting that John McCain had an extramarital affair. And Republicans earlier this year charged that the paper killed a story about Acorn that would have been a “game changer” in the presidential election — a claim I found to be false.“If you know you are a target, it requires extra vigilance,” Rosenstiel said. “Even the suspicion of a bias is a problem all by itself.”

The public editor can be reached by e-mail: public@nytimes.com.

Do you really think he is reachable? Look up! Take my hand, Clark! What are you trying to say, Mr. Hoyt? Hint: what were you just trying not to say?

Here is one email, to the public editor:

Come out from that closet,
Before the door closes,
And brings more pain,
To your reporters’ toeses.

Escape “the polemic world…
…of” which your noses,
Snort up all their lines,
from the Daily Kozes.

Okay, maybe not straight from Daily Koz, all the time; call it poetic license. And, if you read this as you begin your day, Clark, I don’t mean to distract you too much, during the morning conference call with Pravda John Podesta.

---

Also see: Michelle Malkin – A welcome message for the NYT’s new “opinion media monitor”

Senator ‘Educate yourselves or you’ll get stuck in Iraq’ Kerry (D-MA): ‘Everybody knows’ most legislators don’t read the bills they sign.

Remember in 2006 when John Kerry infamously told students:

You know, education, if you make the most of it, if you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, uh, you, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.

So, Senator Kerry should be all for giving legislators (and the public) 72 hours to read sweeping legislative bills before they are voted on, right? Well, not exactly. This is what he said to the members of a Senate Finance Committee last week:

This is fundamentally a delay tactic. I mean, let’s be honest about it. The legislative language, everybody knows, is relatively arcane, legalistic, and most people don’t read the legislative language.

Doublespeak much, Senator Kerry?

I wonder when Stephen King will weigh in.

 

Photo: FreeRepublic.com