Cartoon of the day:
News I Choose
How American Sniper Almost Became an Anti-American Flick Under Spielberg
Flashback to Munich
Spielberg took a story about Israeli operatives avenging a terrorist attack and turned it around to make it sympathetic to the terrorists while minimizing their atrocity.
Before Clint Eastwood was on board with American Sniper, Spielberg had already been there. And he had an idea… the same bad idea.
After a Spielberg flirtation — he wanted to humanize the other side through that doppelganger sniper killing U.S. soldiers for the other side — they enlisted Eastwood, who tells a smartly spare anti-war story about the price of bravery in battle.
Humanizing the other side was how Spielberg had justified slipping Munich around from anti-terror to anti-Israel.
SPIEGEL: Your opponents say that you “humanize” terror.
Spielberg: Do these critics really mean that terrorists are not human beings? I try not to demonize them. Again, this has absolutely nothing to with relativizing their acts or sympathizing with them. But I do believe that it sullies the memory of the victims if we do not ask questions about the reasons, about the roots of terror.
Spielberg’s larger agenda was not simply anti-Israel, but pro-terrorist.
‘I find it kind of astonishing that people who don’t like this movie are saying that I’m trying to humanise terrorists,’ he says, adding in exasperation, ‘as if it was ever acceptable for me to dehumanise anyone in any of my pictures. Some political critics would like to see these people dehumanised because when you take away someone’s humanity you can do anything to them, you’re not committing a crime because they’re not human. This film clearly states that the Black September of the Munich murders were terrorists. These were unforgivable actions but until we begin to ask questions about who these terrorists are and why terrorism happens, we’re never going to get to the truth of why 9/11 happened, for instance.’
And indeed Spielberg explicitly makes the 9/11 link in Munich. It’s not hard to imagine what he would have done with American Sniper if he had gotten his hands on it.
USA Today published a study on the political effect of cable news networks on viewers. It makes sense. The survey says watching Fox News makes you more conservative, watching MSNBC makes you more liberal and if you watch CNN you never think any airplane is going to land safely or be found.
Something to think about:
A cop kills a black man.
Liberals: “ALL COPS ARE BAD!”
A crazed person shoots someone.
Liberals: “ALL GUNS ARE BAD!”
A Muslim kills innocent people for his God.
Liberals: “YOU CAN’T JUDGE ALL MUSLIMS BY THE ACTIONS OF A MINORITY!”
It’s this kind of logic that makes it impossible to take them seriously.
~ The Libtard Show
The Most Dishonest Year on Record
Last week, according to our crackerjack mainstream media, NASA announced that 2014 was the hottest year, like, ever.
No, really. The New York Times began its report with: “Last year was the hottest in earth’s recorded history.”
Well, not really. As we’re about to see, this is a claim that dissolves on contact with actual science. But that didn’t stop the press from running with it.
If you follow the link I gave to the New York Times piece, you will see that this opening sentence has since been rewritten, for reasons which will soon become clear. But the Times wasn’t the only paper to start with that claim, and most of the headlines are still up. The Washington Post has: “2014 Was the Hottest Year in Recorded History.” The Boston Globe: “2014 Was Earth’s Hottest Year in Recorded History.” And so on.
You can see how misleading this is. When you read the phrase “in recorded history,” you think we’re talking about a really long time—the time dating back to the first historical records in Sumeria, circa 3500 BC. (That’s what you’ll find if you look up the phrase “recorded history.”) That’s a time frame of 5,000 to 6,000 years. But in the case of the temperature record, it actually means only 135 years. Accurate, systematic, global thermometer measurements of surface temperatures go back only to 1880. That’s why the Times report, presumably after getting whacked for a wildly misleading opening sentence, changed it to: “Last year was the hottest on earth since record-keeping began in 1880.” Which is a whole lot less impressive.
Liam Neeson spoke out this week and said that he believes America has too many guns. And nearly all of them were used by Liam Neeson in “Taken 3.” ~ Seth Meyers
The Good the Bad and the Bullshit
Boston CBS Affiliate Angers Far Left Tools Who Blocked Highway
“Protesters React To Negative Backlash Following I-93 Sit-In,” Boston’s WBZ-TV reports, sending out a reporter to the homes of some of the protestors who blocked a major highway because Ferguson, maaaaan. Curiously, after disrupting commuters and potentially delaying ambulances, firemen, and other emergency responders, the protestors — who look to be straight out of central casting, including several who apart from their ultra-retro ’70s-era Bob Marley/Mumia-style dreads are living perfectly bourgeois lives in their upper middle class parents’ homes and condos — aren’t happy about a journalist showing up to knock on their doors.
Branco cartoon from Legal Insurrection http://legalinsurrection.com/
Charlie Hebdo Editor: When Our Cover Is Blurred, “You Blur Our Democracy, Secularism And Freedom”
CHUCK TODD: I’m just curious of your reaction. Many news organizations, including our own, have not shown your cover completely. Either blurred out. And it’s a decisions we made editorially. No government told us to do anything. But it was a decision we made. And every news organization is making their own decision. What is your reaction to our decision and others who have chosen not to show your cover?
GERARD BIARD: Listen, we cannot blame newspapers that already suffer much difficulty in getting published and distributed in totalitarian regimes for not publishing a cartoon which could cost them, at best jail, and at worst death. On the other hand, I am quite critical of newspapers which are published in democratic countries.
This cartoon is not just a little figure, a little Mohammed drawn by Luz. It’s a symbol. It’s the symbol of freedom of speech, of freedom of [conscience], of democracy, and secularism. It is this symbol that these newspapers refuse to publish, this is what they must understand. When they refuse to publish this cartoon, when they blur it out, when they decline to publish it, they blur out democracy, secularism, freedom of [conscience], and they insult the citizenship.
CHUCK TODD: Do you feel like you’re a part of this war right now, this war that’s taking place in the Western world between some radical Islamists? Do you feel like you’ve been drawn into this war?
GERARD BIARD: We do not kill anyone. We should stop conflating the murderers and the victims. We must stop declaring that those who write and draw are “provocateurs,” that they are throwing gas on the fire. We must not place thinkers and artists in the same category as murderers. We are not warriors. We only defend one thing: Freedom, our freedom, secularism, freedom of conscience and democracy.
I would say that the Charlie Hebdo editor, Gerard Biard, put Todd quote nicely in his place. On the side of censorship by the terrorists. Well done Monsieur Biard!
Sniper Brushes Off Michael Moore Attack: ‘A Lot of My Friends Died’ for His Freedom of Speech
The Last Stuff:
Intelligence Tests for Liberals
American Sniper has lit up the box office over the weekend, with packed theaters having to turn away moviegoers. Selma, not so much. The total box office for American Sniper may well top $100 million by the end of the weekend.
And guess who really really hates the success of this movie? Liberals. Like Guardian columnist Lindy West: “The real American Sniper was a hate-filled killer. Why are simplistic patriots treating him as a hero?”
Here’s another intelligence test for liberals: a study from the Solar Foundation that finds that there are now as many solar power jobs in the U.S. as there are coal jobs. Great news, right? Perhaps if you’re an economically illiterate liberal it is. Let’s see: coal produces 39 percent of America’s electricity, while solar power produces less than 1 percent at best. If solar really requires the same amount of workers to produce so little energy compared to coal, it’s obviously a really inefficient energy source. No wonder it costs so much more.