Modern Muslim Family

Remember how the Islamic San Bernadino terrorist massacre was originally reported?

Here’s a flashback:

However, the motive for the shooting remained unclear.

Farooq’s brother-in-law Farhan Khan said he spoke to him a week ago and could not offer any reason for the shootings.

“I have no idea why he’d do that, do something like this. I have absolutely no idea, I am in shock myself,” he said.

Ah yes – who could ever understand this strange and unfamiliar turn of events?!

Notice the strong emphasis on family members exclaiming shock and incomprehension at this bizarre terrorist incident.

Now, let’s consider what has become abundantly clear:

When Syed Rizwan Farook and his wife Tashfeen Malik murdered fourteen people and wounded twenty-one at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California, Farook’s family, having lawyered up, instructed its legal representatives to tell the world how shocked – shocked! – they were by the massacre. However, just as Captain Renault is handed his winnings immediately after telling Rick Blaine of his shock that gambling was going on in Rick’s Café Americain, so also in this case did the family’s shock seem increasingly less genuine the more that became known about them.

Initially, however, the lie was fed easily to a credulous mainstream media. One of the Farook family lawyers, David Chesley, immediately found the nearest microphone and declared: “None of the family members had any idea that this was going to take place. They were totally shocked.”

Even in stories that reported this, however, the story started to unravel. No sooner had the Associated Press quoted Chesley that it noted that he and another Farook family lawyer, Mohammad Abuershaid, said that “Farook’s mother lived with the couple but she stayed upstairs and didn’t notice they had stockpiled 12 pipe bombs and well over 4,500 rounds of ammunition.”

Farook’s mother didn’t notice the twelve pipe bombs and well over 4,500 rounds of ammunition because she “stayed upstairs”? Was she an invalid, then, who never ventured downstairs at all? If so, why did the couple leave their six-month-old daughter in her care when they went off to shoot Infidels for Allah?

And now it has come out that Mom did venture downstairs now and again after all, and that her eye may indeed have caught the site of a stray pipe bomb or two. According to the Daily Mail, “FBI agents found an empty GoPro package, shooting targets and tools inside a car belonging to” Rafia Farook, Syed’s mother. Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik mounted GoPro cameras on their body armor before they began their jihad massacre; apparently, like other jihad killers before them, they hoped to cheer and encourage the faithful with scenes of the bloodbath. Authorities are investigating the possibility that Rafia Farook aided in the planning and preparation of the San Bernardino jihad massacre.

Rafia might have taken this car to meetings of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), of which she was an active member. ICNA openly supports Sharia and the caliphate, and has links to the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as to the Pakistani jihad group Jamaat-e-Islami.

The family’s shock at the murders appears even more feigned in light of revelations from Syed Rizwan Farook’s father, who is also named Syed Farook. The elder Syed has characterized his ex-wife Rafia as “very religious,” like the killer, to whom he referred as Rizwan. “Rizwan was the mama’s boy,” he recounted, “and she is very religious like him. Once we had a dispute about the historical figure of Jesus, my son yelled that I was an unbeliever and decided that marriage with my wife had to end.” The son insisted on the divorce because he considered the father an “unbeliever.”

What’s more, old man Farook said that his son was an open supporter of the Islamic State, and, of course, hated Israel: “He said he shared the ideology of al-Baghdadi to create an Islamic state, and he was obsessed with Israel.” Moderate “unbeliever” Papa then told his son to bide his time since, in the immortal words of Tom Lehrer, everybody hated the Jews: “I kept telling him always: stay calm, be patient, in two years Israel will no longer exist. Geopolitics is changing: Russia, China, America too, nobody wants the Jews there.” Moderate!

So right in the heart of sunny Redlands, California, where Syed Rizwan and Tashfeen lived with their baby and Rafia (however safely ensconced upstairs, away from the pipe bombs, Grandma may have been), there was an open supporter of the Islamic State and an open supporter of the concept of the caliphate. Then we must not forget the winsome Tashfeen, who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State during the attack, was linked to a jihadi mosque in Pakistan, and who had become, in one of her teacher’s words, “a religious person” who often told people “to live according to the teachings of Islam.” 

Despite all that and more, Tashfeen passed FBI and DHS background checks and was allowed to enter the United States. And as she and her loving hubby amassed pipe bombs and thousands of rounds of ammunition, authorities didn’t bat an eye. No report has indicated that they were ever questioned, or were under any kind of surveillance, or were on any watch list. 

After all, they were just pious Muslims – and anyone who believes that pious Muslims who are assembling pipe bombs might be up to no good is a racist, bigoted Islamophobe, right? But now the Farooks, the modern jihad family, and the fourteen dead left in their wake, stand as a lesson as to how urgently our law enforcement and intelligence operations need to adopt a realistic approach to the jihad threat, and to discard today’s prevailing politically correct fantasies. But the dead bodies are going to have to be piled up much higher for that reform even to become a possibility.

I guess you can’t keep truth in the darkness forever.

And that really sums up the façade that is the media’s representation of Islam: a crumbling, increasingly-exposed mess of lies that the blazing light of truth is burning up.

Real Islam is violent and real Muslims want to see Islam achieve its global goals.

I’m all for lukewarm, half-hearted Muslims who want to live peaceably but in the end, real Muslims will be coming for them just as hard and fast as they do for Christians and Jews.

There is always hope in Jesus Messiah for the cruelest Muslim tyrant or the most lukewarm, Westernised Muslim and it is my prayer that Christians recognise that no version of Islam is acceptable before our Lord Jesus.


The Mercy-Killing Of The West By Islam: Brought To You By Leftist Western Leaders, Academics And The Mainstream Media 

Peter Smith’s words below are worth heeding and he has nailed a serious, culture-altering problem. 

There is a solution though which he doesn’t offer and that is Christ Jesus, King of the nations in whom humanity finds salvation.

Nonetheless, salvation in Jesus won’t stop the West from eroding into a quagmire of philosophical idiocy nor the brutal assault from Islam that idiotic quagmires demand.

It is there, dead ahead and clear as day, the looming lee shore of terror, intolerance, tribal savagery and the liberties of all curtailed in the name of defending against an enemy our leaders perversely refuse to recognise, let alone name
Just suppose it were possible to shoot people in the name of a religion and have the leader of the Free World, together with his media sycophants, deplore gun ownership among potential victims. Just suppose it were possible to shoot people in the name of a religion and have the leader of the Free World, together with his media sycophants, refuse to blame and name the religion. Just suppose it were possible to shoot people in the name of a religion and have the leader of the Free World, together with his media sycophants, mainly fret about a potential backlash against followers of the religion.

That, indeed, would be cunning plan of Baldrick proportions. And it would, of course, be completely fanciful to imagine it would ever work. Wouldn’t it?

One “expert” on CNN explained that the attack in San Bernardino was likely to be workplace violence. But the interviewer asked how come Syed Farook’s wife, Tashfeen Malik, having left their 6-month-old baby at home, was with him, gun in hand? He responded smoothly that he may have enjoined her in his disgruntlement. But the interviewer, who inexplicably continued to take this nincompoop seriously, asked how come they attacked in combat gear? That is unusual, the nincompoop agreed, without this at all affecting his opinion that the massacre was most likely work-related.

In company with the President, CNN — and almost certainly most other mainstream media — and also the FBI, held out for as long as possible in the face of the evidence. They did their politically-correct best to put off conceding what was bleeding obvious from the start to anyone of average common sense. According to a Fox News reporter on the ground, the FBI even flirted with describing the event as work-inspired terrorism before settling on terrorism.

But still conjoining the descriptor “Islamic” with terrorism proved a step too far. And, just in case FBI Director James Comey stepped out of line and upset his President by mentioning Islam at his media conference, Attorney General Loretta Lynch sat by his side with a cattle prod resting on his sensitive parts. Figuratively speaking, I think.

Born in America, Farook had recently become devout and grown out his beard. He had travelled to Mecca, where he met Malik in person, having ‘wooed’ her over the internet. She was a Pakistani national living in Saudi Arabia. She entered the US on a visa reserved for intended marriage partners of American citizens. She subsequently shunned American values beneath a full burqa and helped gun down the same people who had given her a ‘baby shower’. It is disgusting and sickening and could only emerge from malignant ethos.

Eventually the IEDs which the pair had made in their garage, their destruction of communication devices, Farook’s social media liaison with extremists on an FBI watch list, and Malik’s pledging of allegiance on Facebook to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi probably, just barely, gave the game away. Apparently, none of Farook’s three siblings, or his mother who lived with Farook and Malik, noticed anything amiss. Not a thing! According to the family’s lawyers they are all shocked. Hmm, might have heard that before.

Reportedly, a neighbour saw what she thought were strange goings on, with numbers of young, Middle-Eastern young men repeatedly going in and out of Farook’s garage late at night. She also saw lots of boxes being delivered. Apparently she was afraid to contact the authorities for fear of being branded a bigot. I don’t know, but if Farook had been investigated, he might, like ‘clock boy’, have been able to claim Islamophobic victimization, have been invited to the White House, and sued for a huge amount of money.

We are in trouble; big trouble. The trouble is not that some people want to destroy us and our civilisation in the name of their morbid religion. That is as plain as the tumbling Twin Towers. The trouble is that significant numbers of commentators and political leaders and masses of Western self-hating leftists, greenies and borderless-world creeps are determined to look the other way, even to the extent of looking ridiculous.

In another time ISIS would have been destroyed by now. Mosques would have been infiltrated and the trouble makers rooted out. And, populations of Muslims – if, in the first place, such large numbers had ever been let in — would have been actively encouraged to integrate rather than set up separate cultish communes in the suburbs of major Western cities. Mind you, then multiculturalism hadn’t been invented and foisted on Western societies, patriotism and national pride were not openly despised by the mainstream media, and the aforementioned creeps were no more than an eccentric fringe group.

Western Leaders And The Mainstream Media Facilitate And Are Complicit In Islamic Terror

Bill Muehlenberg tells it how it is:

I am angry – really angry. Angry at the Islamic terror attacks in Paris? Yes, of course. But I am also absolutely outraged at the lamestream media and its despicable coverage of this tragic affair. I spent most of Sunday having the great misfortune of listening to the Australian MSM on the attacks.

One fool journalist after another, one clueless media person after another, and one useless “expert” after another spouted off so much utter PC baloney and dhimmi idiocy that it made my blood boil. No one wanted to mention the “I” word. No one wanted to mention that there is an enemy which has vowed to destroy us.

No one wanted to mention that a particular political ideology, masquerading as a religion, has been doing this sort of stuff for 1400 years now. No one wanted to mention that it was not the West’s fault, but the fault of devout Muslims, taking their faith seriously.

Even 8-10 hours after the attacks there were still mindless wonders assuring us we cannot be sure who did this. Obama also said that he would ‘not speculate on who was responsible’. And how often did I hear nonsense like ‘We must not stigmatise Muslims’.

How many pointed the finger at the West? How many of these ‘experts’ managed to say that France and the West had brought this upon themselves. And right on cue, the dhimmi commentariat were mentioning the Crusades! Yep, 400 casualties in Paris are all OUR fault! Of course.

And the chattering classes were especially loathe to see any Islamic conspiracy here. Amazing how eight lone wolves could coincidentally do so much damage at the same time, and without any ideological basis for it. Likely disgruntled Sunday school teachers. And it is probably all Tony Abbott’s fault anyway.

After a while the lamestream media could no longer deny that this was terrorism. But not one commentator had the guts to tell us the truth: this is ISLAMIC terrorism. Not Baptist terrorism. Not Confucian terrorism. There is a political ideology behind all this. Until we identify who and what we are up against, we will keep losing, and more innocent men, women and children will horrifically die.

I actually saw one loon claim that the attacks were caused by capitalism! Cluelessness abounds. Just two days ago the American Dhimmi-in-Chief assured the American people that “ISIS has been contained” and that “ISIS is not gaining strength”. Yeah right, try telling that to the French.

And clueless critics are already saying I and other realists are fear mongering. Umm, stampeding Muslims massacring infidels do a pretty good job of instilling fear I would have thought. No need to shoot the messenger. Telling truth is always crucial, especially when you are under attack.

However a few brave souls here in Australia did get it right. Miranda Devine spoke some much needed truth here:

Beautiful Paris has been attacked by Islamist terrorists again. There’s no point pretending there’s any doubt about who the perpetrators are. Not a “lone wolf” gunman, not “disaffected youth” or “un-Islamic” madmen.

Less than a year after the Charlie Hebdo massacre, the land of “liberte, egalite and fraternite” has been attacked at its heart, yet again, by Islamist fundamentalists driven by a murderous totalitarian ideology that cannot be appeased.

Co-ordinated, militaristic attacks by suicide bombers and gunmen on soft targets at six locations across Paris are designed to cause maximum casualties and maximum terror.

Survivors say terrorists wielding Kalashnikovs yelled “Allahu Akbar”, as they opened fire on young people watching a rock concert at the Le Bataclan theatre, scene of a dramatic police operation to rescue hostages from the carnage where 100 people were reported dead

And Andrew Bolt wasted no words on this:

Spare me the empty talk of politicians talking of their “shock” and “resolve” over the Paris massacre. Spare me the weasel words of our new Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, who yesterday could not bring himself to even whisper the word “Islam”.

But, no, here we go again with the same evasions, this time after more than 120 Parisians were slaughtered by Islamists for not being Muslim enough. “This is an attack … on all humanity,” declared Turnbull from Berlin. Er, no, it wasn’t. This was an utterly inevitable attack by Islamists on the French — indeed the West — for not submitting to their brand of faith

Or as Brendan O’Neil from the UK put it:

Less than 24 hours after the barbarism in Paris, the bodies of more than 120 concertgoers, Friday-night revellers and children barely cold, and the apologism has already begun. They couldn’t even wait a whole day, these cultural appeasers, whose kneejerk response to every act of terrorism is to ask what we the wicked West did to deserve it, or to argue that we the wicked West will make things worse with our response to it. The simple fact of our existence makes us ripe for murderous assault, apparently; and the folly of responding to such assaults with either police activity at home or military activity abroad makes us riper still for attack. We’re damned if we stay still, damned if we take action. Our citizens must die because our nations are nasty.

Indeed, former Prime Minister Tony Abbott had been warning Europeans just days ago about not allowing porous borders and open slather immigration policy. He was of course one hundred percent right, yet our current PM Malcolm Turnbull actually attacked Abbott for his sensible and proper remarks.

Many have warned that IS terrorists are quite happy to implant themselves in with the masses of migrating refugees in Europe, and that seems to be a successful strategy indeed. Some news reports already have mentioned that some of the dead jihadists had Syrian passports. Said one news item

One of the terrorists responsible for the slaughter of 129 people in the Paris attacks held a passport used to enter Europe from Syria, officials have claimed. The shocking development suggests the killer may have been posing as a refugee before travelling across the continent to carry out the atrocity.

Officials have also revealed a second man who carried out the mass murder was likely to have passed through to the continent in a similar way. A Greek government official revealed the first terrorist, who died in the series of attacks on the French capital, held the document of a man who had passed into the southern European country, probably by refugee boat, last month.

Much more sensible commentary is starting to emerge on these horrific attacks, so let me quote from a few of them. David French offers some advice on the way forward:

Francois Hollande is pledging to wage “pitiless” war. Good. Now let’s see if France backs up its words with actions. While France is often the butt of jokes about its military prowess, it not only has a centuries-old tradition of military valor, it breeds warriors still. May they be unleashed.

Fourth, if European leaders (and the Obama administration) retain a shred of sanity, they’ll rethink their approach to the migrant crisis and start to close their borders, quickly. There are almost certainly more terrorists who have recently arrived in European capitals, awaiting only weapons, organization, and an opportunity to launch the next attack.

And as usual some of the best commentary on this comes from Mark Steyn. His article “The Barbarians Are Inside, And There Are No Gates” is spot on. let me offer some of his insight and wisdom here:
As I write, Paris is under curfew for the first time since the German occupation, and the death toll from the multiple attacks stands at 158, the vast majority of them slaughtered during a concert at the Bataclan theatre, a delightful bit of 19th century Chinoiserie on the boulevard Voltaire. The last time I was there, if memory serves, was to see Julie Pietri. I’m so bloody sick of these savages shooting and bombing and killing and blowing up everything I like – whether it’s the town where my little girl’s favorite fondue restaurant is or my favorite hotel in Amman or the brave freespeecher who hosted me in Copenhagen …or a music hall where I liked to go to hear a little jazz and pop and get away from the cares of the world for a couple of hours. But look at the photographs from Paris: there’s nowhere to get away from it; the barbarians who yell “Allahu Akbar!” are there waiting for you …when you go to a soccer match, you go to a concert, you go for a drink on a Friday night. They’re there on the train… at the magazine office… in the Kosher supermarket… at the museum in Brussels… outside the barracks in Woolwich…

When the Allahu Akbar boys opened fire, Paris was talking about the climate-change conference due to start later this month, when the world’s leaders will fly in to “solve” a “problem” that doesn’t exist rather than to address the one that does. But don’t worry: we already have a hashtag (#PrayForParis) and doubtless there’ll be another candlelight vigil of weepy tilty-headed wankers. Because as long as we all advertise how sad and sorrowful we are, who needs to do anything?…

Visiting the Bataclan, M Hollande declared that “nous allons mener le combat, il sera impitoyable”: We are going to wage a war that will be pitiless. Does he mean it? Or is he just killing time until Obama and Cameron and Merkel and Justin Trudeau and Malcolm Turnbull fly in and they can all get back to talking about sea levels in the Maldives in the 22nd century? By which time France and Germany and Belgium and Austria and the Netherlands will have been long washed away….

I’m Islamed out. I’m tired of Islam 24/7, at Colorado colleges, Marseilles synagogues, Sydney coffee shops, day after day after day. The west cannot win this thing with a schizophrenic strategy of targeting things and people but not targeting the ideology, of intervening ineffectually overseas and not intervening at all when it comes to the remorseless Islamization and self-segregation of large segments of their own countries.
Yeah, I’m getting pretty sick and tired of all this as well. But as long as we have dhimmi dunces for our leaders, and the media filled with clueless wonders, we can expect a whole lot more of this.

The Mainstream Media And The ABC: The Modern Equivalent Of Reeducation Camps

Some people can’t see the massive shift in Western culture towards serious trouble.

I could list a dozen facets off the top of my head but the reality is that every ape here of the West seems to exhibit the symptoms of a sick and dying society.

Take the issue of murdering children under the euphemism “abortion.”

I have very strong feelings about the 47 million children whose blood and guts have been torn asunder for the sake of convenience in America since Roe vs Wade. 

It’s called righteous anger and zeal for justice, just not by people who are selfish enough to murder children or look the other way while others do it for them.

Those selfish people are leftists, which is really just another euphemism for humanist and, in case it needed mentioning, humanists are all about serving the self.

Don’t get me wrong – I used to be one of them and so I completely empathise with being a supporter of tearing a baby’s guts out because that’s easier than taking responsibility being a parent. God’s forgiveness is greater than my crimes and that of the collective left.

Even now, I am in a war against my flesh which – no surprises – is constantly pulling at me to be self-centred instead of Christ-centred, self-led instead of Spirit-led.

Humanism and leftism don’t want that war – they want peace with an all-consuming enemy (which explains their cowardice before Islam) and their intention is to intimidate and force everyone else to do it (which explains their jackboot tactics with homosexuality).

Bill Muehlenberg’s recent article sums it all up:

The West is in a war. It has enemies aplenty but most of them are in the West itself. Those most eager to destroy the West are not hostile forces from without, but enemies from within. And the mainstream media is now fully involved in this war against the West.

Western media is leftist media, and it is hostile to what most folks in the West believe in and value. Many social commentators have made this case. Early on in his 2011 volume Righteous Indignation Andrew Breitbart put it this way:

Make no mistake: America is in a media war. It is an extension of the Cold War that never ended but shifted to an electronic front. The war between freedom and statism ended geographically when the Berlin Wall fell. But the existential battle never ceased. When the Soviet Union disintegrated, the battle simply took a different form. Instead of missiles the new weapon was language and education, and the international left had successfully constructed a global infrastructure to get its message out.

He continued, “The left does not win its battles in debate. It doesn’t have to. In the twenty-first century, media is everything. The left wins because it controls the narrative. The narrative is controlled by the media. The left is the media. Narrative is everything.”

Exactly right. To understand the Australian media in general, and the ABC in particular, one simply has to be aware of this larger ideological framework. Then all the daily outrages perpetrated by groups like “our” ABC will all make sense. I have documented dozens of cases of outrageous bias, anti-Christian bigotry, and extreme left nonsense pouring forth on a regular basis from the national broadcaster.

Consider the most recent outrage – another “accident” which the ABC head honcho had to again “apologize” for. This despicable network is so utterly consumed in its diabolical hatred of all things conservative, Christian and especially Tony Abbott, that it just cannot stop venting its darkened spleen.

The devils there thought it would be fun to allow through yet another anti-Abbott tweet, with an account called “AbbotLovesAnal”. Gotta love the classy, professional folks who work at “our” ABC. So hate-filled are they, that any gutter crap will be given free run – as long as Abbott is crucified no matter what. Rita Panahi was spot on when she wrote:

Here we go again. The genius crew at the helm of the ABC’s flagship program, Q&A, have yet again covered themselves in ignominy. The decision to broadcast a tweet from an account with a highly offensive handle was either a malicious act of bastardry designed to embarrass Prime Minister Tony Abbott or simply due to gross ineptitude.

You can never be sure with the ABC but it’s remarkable that the lapses, factual errors and unfortunate “accidents” that occur with regular monotony on the behemoth’s many platforms tend to vilify only one side of politics.

Less than three weeks since the Prime Minister lifted a ban on government front benchers appearing on the program, the ideologues at the helm of Q&A have shown they’ve learnt nothing from the Zaky Mallah saga. Hapless CEO Mark Scott was once more left to apologise for the conduct of an organisation that has become a law unto itself.

The simple truth is the ABC is absolutely crawling with Abbott-haters, and they will seek to get away with any vile attack they can, all the while living the good life off our tax dollars. And that the ABC is crawling with lefties, Labor supporters, and anti-Abbott nut jobs is not mere speculation.

A recent piece posted at the Larry Pickering site is most revealing in this regard. It points out the uber-incestuous relationship between the Labor Party and ABC heavyweight:

“Why does the Left media protect the left?”

Because the political commentators of the Left media are either intermingled or married to the left politicians. It’s a family thing and they protect their own.

Greg Combet (Labor) partnered to Juanita Phillips (ABC).

Gai Brodtmann (Labor) married to Chris Uhlmann (ABC).

David Feeney (Labor) married to Liberty Sanger (guest commentator on ABC).

Barry Cassidy (ABC) former speech writer for Bob Hawke (Labor) from 1986-1991 married to Heather Ewart (ABC).

Maxine McKew (ABC) married to Bob Hogg (former ALP national secretary).

Virginia Trioli (ABC) married to Russell Skelton (The Age).

Mark Kenny (Fairfax) married to Virginia Haussegger (ABC).

Christine Wallace (ABC & Fairfax) married to Michael Costello (former Chief of Staff to Labor’s Kim Beazley).

Annabel Crabb (former Fairfax journalist now with the ABC).

Tony Jones (ABC) married to Sarah Ferguson (ABC). Coincidentally Jones took over the Lateline role from Maxine McKew (from ABC presenter to Labor politician).

David Penberthy (journalist) married to Kate Ellis (Labor).

Paul Kelly (former Fairfax journalist) formerly married to Ros Kelly (Labor).

Kerry O’Brien (ABC) former press secretary to Gough Whitlam.

Mark Colvin (ABC) married to Michelle McKenzie (Leichhardt deputy-mayor and Greens Councillor).

Denis Atkins (ABC Insiders regular) married to Melanie Christensen (ABC Canberra).

Paul Barry (ABC) married to Lisa McGregor (ABC).

The lamentable Mike Carlton (formerly Fairfax) and Morag Ramsay (ABC).

Andrew Fraser (Fairfax) and Catriona Jackson (formerly Fairfax and Labor press secretary).

And so the list goes on.

Labor, Fairfax and the ABC are joined at the hip.

Much like the relationship between Labor and the unions.

Why do they protect Burke where they savage Bishop?

They’re just looking after the family………….(wearing “I’ll ride with Burke” T-shirts.)

Hmm, why is all this not one bit surprising? These clowns deny their bias every day of the week, but they are up to their ears in political leftism, and proud of it. Indeed, were we able to do a poll of the voting record of the ABC leadership, I do not doubt for a moment we would find that Labor and the Greens would get 90 per cent of their vote.

American studies have found just that: folks in the media there overwhelmingly vote Democrat, are pro-abortion, pro-homosexuality, pro-big government, and so on. It is obvious in everything we find coming from these media outlets. It is a shameless control of the narrative, to push leftist agendas.

Some years ago now Chris Kenny wrote an article on “Whose ABC?” It is well worth repeating parts of it here. Writing in 2011 he said:

The ABC is certainly the most influential cultural institution in the nation, increasing its complexity and reach almost by the day. The corporation consists of six national and international radio stations, five television stations, online services, publishing and retailing, with annual public funding topping $1 billion, and more than 5000 staff in more than 70 locations in Australia and overseas. Yet as it has expanded there has been no commensurate increase in accountability or responsiveness to the public who fund it.

He continues:

Insiders talk about recruitment policies fuelling a political culture, particular in the Sydney and Melbourne city headquarters, at Ultimo and Southbank, where about half of all ABC staff members are based. There is a relatively low staff turnover so many employees have spent most of their working lives in the ABC, in the main cities. One former board member says recruiting people from a greater variety of backgrounds should be a high priority.

A very different ABC culture exists in the regions, but it has little influence outside of those regions. The ABC is still a heavily centralised beast, with all its operations outside the Sydney-Melbourne-Canberra axis referred to disparagingly as the BAPH states (Brisbane, Adelaide, Perth, Hobart). Each capital has a state director, but because the operations are divided into national silos of television, radio, news and the like, board members believe state directors find it difficult to have any real impact. All big decisions are made in Ultimo. Staff outside NSW jokingly refer to their employer as the SBS: Sydney Broadcasting Service.

There are no easy answers to this Sydney-centric reality except to be aware of it.

But there is no end to the ways the ABC can keep pushing bias. As Kenny wrote just recently:

The ABC seems to have found a novel way to guard against the Green Left bias shown by so many of its leading presenters. Instead of having them conduct their own interviews, Auntie can simply have them read out questions from audiences.

On Lateline last week Tony Jones was interviewing former Labor environment minister Greg Combet. “Let’s go to a Facebook question,” said Jones. “This is from Linda Mae Reeb and it’s on this subject, she asks, ‘Can you estimate the investment required in the Australian renewable market to achieve a 50 per cent reduction in emissions?’ ”

Combet nodded as Jones read it out. Why wouldn’t he? What a pleasant break from the rigours of a forensic television interrogation.

We look forward to similar intermezzos when government ministers are grilled. “I know you’re on the back foot now, Treasurer, and my questioning is getting just a little snide,” Sarah Ferguson might say, “so let’s go to a Facebook question on taxation reform”.

Given revelations about high ABC salaries, perhaps this is also a way to save the public broadcaster some money. There are plenty of presentable and relatively cut-price juniors who could sit in the chair and read out the online questions.

No doubt government staffers are busy setting up fake Facebook accounts so they can post their curly queries. “Prime Minister, if we could just leave the Speaker’s woes and budget difficulties there for a moment we have a Facebook question,” Leigh Sales might say. “This one is from Jenny at Mt Druitt and she asks, ‘To what do you attribute your greatness?’”

Next, no doubt, we’ll have to commission an investigation into question selection. Perhaps a committee could be formed to devise an ABC code of conduct for social media question selection and presentation. A strong tip for rule No 1 would be to ignore Zaky Mallah’s Facebook questions until further notice.

Of course. They already stack their audiences with their buddies, they take video questions and comments from their buddies, and they stack the panels of their shows with their buddies. What bias?

There is no reason in the world why taxpayers must subsidise this gross and appalling bias. De-fund now.

Obama Promised “Change”: Half A Decade Of Inciting Racial Hatred And Violence

Black lives matter in so much as they can lead the left into positions of power but we would be fools to think they actually cared about groups that are collectivized according to superficial skin colour.

Like the proletariat to the almost exclusively bourgeoise Marxist leaders of old, ‘black lives” represents a group of people who can be exploited to position themselves into the government, media, and other stations of power in our society. Sadly, it’s been working for them for a good century and that has culminated in Barack Obama as POTUS.

The following video from Rocking Mr E summarizes and highlights the damage Barack Obama, along with his loyal media cronies, have inflicted upon race relations in the past six and half years:

Stephen Hawking And The Pointless Search For Aliens

There is no proof that aliens exist but based upon a few equally unproven evolutionary assumptions, Stephen Hawking is leading the charge to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to find proof once and for all.

It’s amazing how much the following claims and assumptions sound like religion and philosophy rather than the science that supposedly underlies everything that Hawking and company do.

Consider that the Law of Biogenesis, that life comes only from life, is not only observable, testable, and repeatable (as per scientific empiricism) but it is the only known way that life comes to exist, hence the “Law” of biogenesis rather than the “theory” or the “amusing idea”.

The obvious conclusion, based upon the extensive evidence supporting Biogenesis as a Law, is that the first cause and origin of life is in fact a living source that, since the universe is not eternal, must itself be eternal. That is exactly how the bible described God thousands of years ago and that is who Christians claim God is – the living one who is from everlasting to everlasting.

Yet, Milner, Hawking, and the doting mainstream media are searching for alien life under the assumption that the original source of life did appear through abiogenesis, from that which is not alive. This is an underlying assumption of the biological naturalist philosophy, which if correct would of course make alien life not only a possibility but perhaps likely, if not a certainty.

Yet all the scientific evidence strongly indicates that abiogenesis is a wrong assumption and in spite of all this empirical scientific evidence supporting biogenesis alone, the world’s most renowned scientist is putting his money on the unproven assumption that has no corresponding examples to support it as even possible, let alone probable.

What would make a “scientist” abandon science and instead choose blind faith?

Perhaps an unwillingness to admit the truth: that God is author of life and that we are accountable to him, and furthermore that naturalism is not only wrong but actually a lie.

British cosmologist Stephen Hawking has launched the biggest-ever search for intelligent extraterrestrial life in a 10-year, $135 million project to scan the heavens.

Russian Silicon Valley entrepreneur Yuri Milner, who is funding the Breakthrough Listen initiative, said it would be the most intensive scientific search ever undertaken for signs of extraterrestrial intelligent life.

“In an infinite universe, there must be other occurrences of life,” Mr Hawking said at the launch event at the Royal Society science academy in London.

“Somewhere in the cosmos, perhaps, intelligent life may be watching.

“Either way, there is no bigger question.

“It’s time to commit to finding the answer, to search for life beyond Earth. We must know.”

The project will use some of the biggest telescopes on Earth, searching far deeper into the universe than before for radio spectrum and laser signals.

“We are launching the most comprehensive search program ever,” Mr Milner said.

“Breakthrough Listen takes the search for intelligent life in the universe to a completely new level.”

Mr Milner said the scan would collect more data in one day than a year of any previous search, tracking the million closest stars, the centre of the Milky Way and the 100 closest galaxies.

It’s a huge gamble, of course, but the pay-off would be so colossal … even if the chance of success is small.

British astronomer Martin Rees

“We should not read too much into the lack of confirmed signals,” said the former physics student, who is named after Yuri Gagarin, the first man in outer space.

Earth’s telescopes would be able to detect a signal from similarly-advanced technology sent from the centre of the Milky Way.

A signal from Andromeda, the nearest major galaxy, would need only the power of two times the Three Gorges Dam in China to reach Earth.

“We don’t need to assume that civilisation is way more developed than we are,” Mr Milner said.

Parkes Observatory in NSW to play vital role

Australia will play a crucial role in the project, with the Parkes Observatory in New South Wales signing a multi-million-dollar contract to scan radio waves for life in the cosmos.

The CSIRO will contract a quarter of the telescope’s time for five years to scan for potential radio signals from galaxies beyond our reach.

Professor Matthew Bailes, from Melbourne’s Swinburne University, will be the project’s lead investigator at the Parkes Telescope.

We know there’s lots of worlds out there, but whether or not there’s little green men on there is something we still don’t know.

Professor Matthew Bailes, Swinburne University

“Radio waves are a very efficient way of transmitting information and it’s likely that aliens, if they’re into interstellar communication at all, would be using the radio part of the spectrum,” he said.

“We know there’s lots of worlds out there, but whether or not there’s little green men on them is something we still don’t know.”

Cosmologist Professor Paul Davies from Arizona State University has spent his career studying the question of “what else is out there?” and is also excited by the project.

But he said there would be a number of big questions to ask if the project did find intelligent life.

“Should we respond? Who gets to speak for us? What do we do next?” he said.

“There are no easy answers to these but if we’re going to engage in a dialogue with an alien civilisation this is something that needs the consideration of everybody on the planet.”

Possibility of finding aliens rises a billionfold

Martin Rees, Britain’s astronomer royal and one of the project leaders, said modern technology allowed much more sensitive searches than ever before, though he cautioned against expectations of finding intelligent alien life.

“It’s a huge gamble, of course, but the pay-off would be so colossal … even if the chance of success is small,” the astrophysicist said.

The possibility of finding life had however effectively risen a billionfold through the identification of billions of Earth-like planets in the Milky Way, he said.

“Is there life out there? We may not answer it but this gives a bigger chance that it may be answered in our lifetime,” he said.

The program will be 50 times more sensitive than previous searches, and cover 10 times more of the sky, experts said.

It will scan at least five times more of the radio spectrum, and 100 times faster, while in tandem undertake the deepest and broadest-ever search for optical laser transmissions.

The initiative was launched on the 46th anniversary of the first manned Moon landing.

It is allied with the Breakthrough Message project, an international competition to create digital messages that represent humanity.

There is no commitment to send any messages into space, and the project should spark discussion about whether humans should be sending messages at all out into the void.

I am certainly not suggesting that we should not explore God’s creation. God makes it clear that we should:

“It is the glory of God to conceal things, but the glory of kings is to search things out.” Proverbs‬ ‭25:2‬ ‭ESV‬‬

But there is something to explore and we have the faculties to explore specifically because God created.

Sooner or later, Hawking and the team will find have to acknowledge this.

“For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.” Romans‬ ‭1:18-25‬ ‭ESV‬‬

Covering For Murderers: The Mainstream Media’s Hypocritical Reporting Of The Planned Parenthood Illegal Organ Trade

The mainstream media cannot be trusted.

They promote a very specific anti-Christian worldview and corresponding set of increasingly immoral values, working hard to silence or distort any evidence or viewpoint that exposes their own values for what they are.

They conceal and revise the violent history of Islam while parading and championing homosexuality as a normal, healthy and safe lifestyle.

They hate mentioning anything that reflects badly on abortion (everything) and will never bother to tell you how many Christians are persecuted or murdered each day around the world (a lot).

I have already written about this unraveling of Planned Parenthood’s blood soaked empire with an allusion to the media’s cowardice in defending them here and it seems I am not the only one who noticed.

The Federalist has run an article Mollie Hemingway analyzing the response of some major news networks to the revelation that Planned Parenthood is as evil as many Christians, myself included, have long claimed.

Hemingway notes that their disgusting hypocrisy highlights just how deceptive and disingenuousness some of these media organisations are.

You can find all the associated links, evidence, and images in the original article. Read it and weep for journalist integrity:

At 8:00 AM on Tuesday morning, a pro-life group released two videos showing Planned Parenthood executive Deborah Nucatola munching on a salad and sipping red wine while discussing the harvesting of organs from the babies killed by abortion. One was a nearly 9-minute edited video of the nearly 3-hour discussion. The other was the unedited discussion.

Because of the graphic nature of the discussion — Nucatola specifically discusses altering abortion procedures to procure hearts, brains, lungs, and livers from the babies whose lives Planned Parenthood ends by abortion — the video immediately lit up social media. Unlike most significant stories about major hot-button social issues, however, no major media reported on the news until 4:30 PM that afternoon. Some are still working on (or working on hiding) their coverage of the story. Let’s look at some of the major media outlets and how they did.

Washington Post

The first story out of the gate from major mainstream media came from the Washington Post. It was originally headlined “Undercover video shows Planned Parenthood exec discussing organ harvesting,” and it was remarkably fair to both Planned Parenthood and those who oppose the harvesting of organs from children killed in abortion.

However, by the time the story appeared on page 1 of the Washington Post, it had been significantly altered. You can get the gist from the new headline: “Undercover video shows Planned Parenthood official discussing fetal organs used for research.”

You’ve heard of the journalism adage “If it bleeds, it leads”? Well how about, “There, that doesn’t sound so bad, does it? Probably don’t even need to read this article, do you!”

The executive is downgraded to an official. The wine she drank as she discussed how good Planned Parenthood has gotten at procuring hearts, livers and lungs is completely excised. In both versions, Nucatola’s clear statements about crushing baby bodies above or below their organs is given distance with a journalistic “apparently.”

The revised story introduced additional errors, including that Nucatola was not caught “explicitly talking about selling organs,” (she was) and claiming that Planned Parenthood doesn’t profit from these organ sales even though Nucatola specifically talks about making more money than breaking even.

Associated Press

The Associated Press national social issues reporter David Crary got his story out just over 13 hours after the video broke. His headline gives a preview of the euphemism pile-on he’ll use: “Covert video targets Planned Parenthood fetal-parts policy.”

His lede practically begs you to stop reading:

Anti-abortion activists on Tuesday released an undercover video showing a senior Planned Parenthood official discussing the disposition of parts from aborted fetuses.

The activists contended the video reveals illegalities, but Planned Parenthood said the activity in question was the legal, not-for-profit donation of fetal tissue to research firms.

Crary didn’t even bother to promote his own story, for whatever reason. He wrote nine stories about the Komen Foundation’s attempts to extricate itself from funding Planned Parenthood, including breaking the story. He wrote a total of two stories about Kermit Gosnell, the Philadelphia serial murderer and abortionist. You can read this piece for more information on Crary and the Associated Press’ trouble covering abortion, but perhaps of note for this story:

The Komen team described him as a “Planned Parenthood ally,” who had “gushed” over Planned Parenthood in a February 2011 article featuring Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards. “The article was essentially a rehashed Planned Parenthood press release,” Handel writes. He’s described as “sympathetic” to Richards and “deeply biased” in favor of Planned Parenthood. Komen’s media person says, “she had never spoken to a national reporter who was so openly biased.”


Joining the Associated Press in the “we’re not even trying to be fair” category was Reuters, whose first piece on the scandal was literally headlined, and I want to emphasize I’m not being hyperbolic for effect but accurately conveying the headline: “Planned Parenthood slams secret video as false portrayal of fetus tissue program.”

This story came out nearly 14 hours after the story broke, reads like a Planned Parenthood press release if Planned Parenthood had less regard for its reputation:

Planned Parenthood said on Tuesday a secretly recorded video that surfaced on the Internet falsely portrayed the reproductive health group’s participation in the sale of tissue and body parts from aborted fetuses.

The non-profit organization said the video had been heavily edited and recorded by a group that was established to damage its reputation. It said in a statement the video “falsely portrays Planned Parenthood’s participation in tissue donation programs that support lifesaving scientific research.”

Nowhere in the story (written by Jon Herskovitz, with additional reporting by Patrick Enright and David Bailey in Minneapolis, and editing by Jonathan Oatis and Toni Reinhold) do we we learn that the group put out a complete, unedited, nearly 3-hour video at the same exact time as the edited 8-minute version. The double-claim of falsehood provided by Reuters on behalf of Planned Parenthood in the first two paragraphs is never substantiated, though a meager attempt is made to repeat Planned Parenthood talking points in the final paragraphs.


The Weekly Standard’s John McCormack provided the journalistic service of exposing precisely what talking points Planned Parenthood was sending out to reporters in an attempt to quash or reframe the story. The documents can be found here. One of the pieces of information Planned Parenthood’s public relations firm sent out suggested that David Daleiden of the Center for Medical Progress, the group that performed the undercover investigation of Planned Parenthood, should not be trusted because he has “written articles for opposition outlet The Weekly Standard and Human Life Review.”

The Weekly Standard is a large, respected weekly magazine whose writers include some of the best writers working today, including P.J. O’Rourke, Matt Labash, Andrew Ferguson, Jonathan Last, Vic Matus, Christopher Caldwell and the dashing Mark Hemingway. The idea that having written a sole article for the publication would be disqualifying is laughable to the extreme. And yet…

Newsweek’s story, authored by Polly Mosendz, shows the influence Planned Parenthood’s backgrounder had on her journalism:

The center’s leader, David Daleiden, has written anti-abortion literature for The Weekly Standard and is referenced on the pro-life website of Jill Stanek. Files uploaded by Daleiden to Scribd include “Prayers for the day,” which Daleiden describes as “one way to structure your prayer life throughout the day that some people may find helpful.”

Though Daleiden’s organization shares a name with the Manhattan Institute’s Center for Medical Progress, a spokeswoman for the institute told Newsweek the groups are “totally separate organizations” who have “never been affiliated.” This is all to say, the video was not made by a purely scientific center, despite the organization’s name, nor in a purely objective manner.

I joke about journalists being hostile to Christians, but I’m not sure I’ve seen someone’s prayer life used in an attempt to discredit someone. I’m almost impressed. Horrified, mostly, but also kind of impressed at how anti-religious the journalism is. Also, way to regurgitate Planned Parenthood talking points! You’re on your way to the big Andrea Mitchell-leagues!

Daily Beast

I don’t think the Daily Beast has gotten around to profiling Deborah Nucatola, the woman who talked about “crushing” babies’ bodies in such a way as to harvest their “lungs,” and “livers,” and “hearts,” and what not, but they did accept their Planned Parenthood marching orders for writing hit pieces about David Daleiden. Here’s Samantha Allen’s version of Media Matters for America’s version of Planned Parenthood’s hit on Daleiden.


CNN’s first piece on the Planned Parenthood scandal is actually a really good and fair story, in my initial read. It presents alternate points of view without siding with one or the other or accepting anyone’s claims at face value.

I did get a kick out of the accompanying video which begins, “In this heavily and selectively edited video …” What’s funny about this is that 100% of video news reports not involving live guests are very “heavily and selectively edited.” Because that’s how you do broadcast journalism. We don’t see journalists introduce their reports by noting that fact, usually.

New York Times

The newspaper finally put up its story on the matter by 12:30 am the next day. It’s headlined “Video Accuses Planned Parenthood of Crime.” The piece accepts Planned Parenthood talking points completely. Its author, Jackie Calmes, must not have reviewed the transcript of the full video, or the full video. She devotes much space to defending Planned Parenthood against the charge it sells organs to purchasers. Here’s a representative section:

While the video, which was circulated on the Internet, alleges that Planned Parenthood is guilty of the crime of selling fetal remains, the official tells her questioners more than once that the cost, $30 to $100, is reimbursement for clinics’ expenses.

Of course, the official also specifically said that affiliates like to “do better” than “break even,” which Calmes doesn’t mention:

If it’s just reimbursement for clinics’ expenses, what in the world would Nucatola mean by that? Further, how do we know that these price claims represent actual expenses? What are the expenses for baby organ harvesting, exactly?

When someone read the following paragraph to me, I thought it must be an editorial from the New York Times because the language was so hystrionic:

As conservatives condemned Planned Parenthood for what they called “selling baby parts,” the reaction threatened to incite the sort of opposition that has led congressional Republicans in recent years to try to shut down the government unless Planned Parenthood was stripped of federal money.

Nope, just New York Times “news” writing. And it actually gets worse. She just fully editorializes throughout the piece. She also makes it seem like Planned Parenthood does breast cancer “tests” instead of just telling women they should go get breast cancer tests, but that’s a separate issue entirely.

Anyway, thanks to one journalist who got me thinking about the comparison, I thought it would be interesting to compare how the New York Times wrote up another undercover video hurting a Republican. When Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was surreptitiously videotaped in a private fundraising session making comments about “47 percent” of Americans, the New York Times didn’t wait terribly long to get it up on the site.

So the New York Times, which only had edited, snipped remarks from Romney, published a story on the matter in under three hours. For the Planned Parenthood scandal, with a full, unedited, nearly 3-hour video released at 8:00 AM, it took the publication around 16 hours to get a story up. The Romney story ran on the front page the next day. The Planned Parenthood scandal ran on page A16 the next day.

The New York Times story on Mitt Romney rightly focused not on how the video was obtained or the Democratic operative who obtained it but, instead, on the snippet of the statements it revealed. Reporters Michael Shear and Michael Barbaro’s headline was “In Video Clip, Romney Calls 47% ‘Dependent’ and Feeling Entitled.”

By contrast, the New York Times story on Planned Parenthood focuses entirely on criticism of the group behind the video, devoting the first 10 paragraphs to Planned Parenthood framing and spin and failing to speak with a single person who disagrees with the harvesting of baby organs. The story even failed to include the most interesting quotes from the video, such as the one where Deborah Nucatola discusses crushing babies in such a way as to preserve their valuable organs. Despite the fact that Nucatola is quite explicit about the harvesting of babies’ brains, hearts, lungs and livers, the story doesn’t mention anything even touching on the issue.

Imagine, if you will, the New York Times failing to quote Mitt Romney’s notorious 47% line (for the record, a search of the New York Times website shows that the paper has 1,010 mentions).

Justin Miller, senior editor at the Daily Beast, claimed that the Romney video “wasn’t edited with cuts,” while the Planned Parenthood video was. That’s actually not true.

In fact, the nearly 3-hour unedited video of the discussion of baby organ harvesting was released at the same time as the shorter, edited clip. And what’s more, the media ran with the Romney video story well before the full 68-minute video was released.

The original Mother Jones story on the matter had only five brief snippets of those 68 minutes, running 1:06, 1:45, :37, :46, and :53. The lack of context for these brief remarks didn’t prevent outlsuch as the New York Times from running with the story.

It’s only been two years since the media struggled to even cover the story of Kermit Gosnell, the abortion doctor and serial murderer. After being shamed into covering the “local crime story” by readers and viewers who had requested coverage for years, the media offered a few mea culpas and promised to improve coverage of the abortion topic and present the issue more fairly.

They have repeatedly failed, whether the story was cheerleading for late-term abortion supporter Wendy Davis or accurately covering religious Americans opposition to paying for abortifacients.

This story, however, is so big that it is proceeding even against the wishes of the media and their brethren at Planned Parenthood. As the federal government and state governments prepare to truly investigate Planned Parenthood’s chop shops, let’s hope coverage improves mightily.

As for Australia’s disastrous tax-payer funded broadcasting service – the ABC – I haven’t seen a word about this story.

No surprises there.

These are the universally deceitful times we live in – to paraphrase George Orwell – where telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

It’s just a pity that we have to tell the truth in spite of the mainstream media.