AIM Joins Larry Klayman's Anti-Obama Rally Topic: Accuracy in Media
Accuracy in Media announced in a Nov. 14 blog post:
Accuracy in Media has joined the “Reclaim America Now Coalition,” put together by Freedom Watch. AIM Editor Roger Aronoff will be speaking at the Washington D.C. rally on November 19th at Lafayette Park, across from the White House. To learn more about the rally, and the coalition, click on the link below.
If you go to the Reclaim America Now website, you'll find that it's a project of failed lawyer Larry Klayman, the rabid Obama-hater (and man found by a judge to have engaged in "inappropriate behavior" with his children). AIM thus joins a rogue's gallery of participants that includes WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah, Floyd Brown and Bradlee Dean.
We can only presume this means that AIM's participation in this event constitutes an endorsement of Klayman's increasingly unhinged anti-Obama rhetoric, which recently culminated in a call for Obama "to put the Quran down, to get up off his knees, and to figuratively come up with his hands out."
P.S. Klayman's website also plays the chorus of the Martina McBride song "Independence Day." Klayman is apparently unaware that the song is about domestic abuse, not patriotism.
AIM Acknowledges '60 Minutes' Benghazi Implosion; MRC Still Silent Topic: Accuracy in Media
We noted last week that while Accuracy in Media joined others in the ConWeb in promoting a CBS "60 Minutes" story that included the account of a purported eyewitness to the 2012 attack on a U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya, it also noted that the report failed to disclose that the purported eyewitness had also written a book published by a division of CBS. But it was also slow in responding to questions about the witness' credibility.
Now that the story of the "60 Minutes" witness, Dylan Davies aka "Morgan Jones," has completely imploded, AIM is finally acknowledging the problems in a Nov. 8 column by Roger Aronoff, in which he criticizes how "60 Minutes" correspondent Lara Logan and others "were apparently taken in by this charlatan" and "doubled down" after criticism first surfaced.
Aronoff also engages in some damage control, insisting that "While Davies’ account may have been a lie, the administration still has much to answer for." He adds:
Maybe “60 Minutes” can re-examine the rest of the material from their hundred or so interviews they did for the segment, and come up with a hard-hitting story, that is also accurate. As Lara Logan said in the “60 Minutes Overtime” website-only feature, which has been pulled from the “60 Minutes” website: “So, we left about 98 percent of what we learned on the floor—didn’t even report it—because unless we could substantiate it with primary sources that we truly trusted and whose motivations we trusted, then we didn’t even go there.”
Many lies have circulated regarding the Benghazi attacks of last year. This wasn’t the first. That is why Accuracy in Media founded the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi, which is searching for the truth behind the attacks.
You mean that kangaroo court that's stacked with Obama-haters and birthers?
Meanwhile, the Media Research Center, which also touted the now-discredited "60 Minutes" report, has been utterly silent on its implosion. The only acknowledgement of the controversy so far is an Associated Press article reprinted at CNSNews.com about Davie's book being withdrawn by its publishe.r
MRC, AIM Tout Benghazi 'Witness,' Ignore His Lies Topic: Accuracy in Media
In an Oct. 28 Media Research Center item, Matthew Balan touts how a segment by Lara Logan on "60 Minutes" about the Benghazi attack featured "an actual eyewitness of the attack":
Logan led with her "misinformation" line, and introduced Morgan Jones, a former member of the British military, who uses that pseudonym for personal safety reasons. Jones was in charge of the unarmed security force inside the walls of the main U.S. compound in Benghazi. He revealed that he snuck inside the hospital where Ambassador Stevens had been taken, and quickly learned about diplomat's death. Jones also outlined his concerns about the armed militia guarding the facility.
Similarly, in an Oct. 31 Accuracy in Media column, Roger Aronoff highlights the Morgan Jones interview:
The segment, which can be viewed online, interviews one “Morgan Jones,” a self-identified Blue Mountain security chief who was at an apartment 15 minutes away when the attack started at the Benghazi Special Mission Compound in Benghazi on September 11, 2012.
Jones raced to the compound, scaled the 12-foot wall, and attempted to enter the compound to assist those inside, but they had already been rescued by a CIA rapid-response team that included the now-deceased Tyrone Woods.
“[The attackers] said, ‘We’re here to kill Americans, not Libyans,’” recounts Jones in an emotional moment. “So they’d give them a good beating, pistol whip them, beat them with their rifle, and let them go.”
But so far, neither Balan nor Aronoff have told their readers that the account "Morgan Jones" told on "60 Minutes" differs sharply from what he told his then-employer, that he couldn't get anywhere near the Benghazi compound during the attack. The Washington Post reports:
But in a written account that Jones, whose real name was confirmed as Dylan Davies by several officials who worked with him in Benghazi, provided to his employer three days after the attack, he told a different story of his experiences that night.
In Davies’s 2 1/2-page incident report to Blue Mountain, the Britain-based contractor hired by the State Department to handle perimeter security at the compound, he wrote that he spent most of that night at his Benghazi beach-side villa. Although he attempted to get to the compound, he wrote in the report, “we could not get anywhere near . . . as roadblocks had been set up.”
Aronoff, to his credit, did note something Balan didn't: that Fox News reported that Jones demanded money to tell his story, and that Jones' book is published by Simon & Schuster, which is a division of CBS, which should raise questions about an undisclosed quid pro quo.
AIM's Caruba Pretends Anti-Immigration Group Is 'Non-Partisan' Topic: Accuracy in Media
In an Oct. 24 column for Accuracy in Media bashing immigration reform, Alan Caruba does his best to whitewash the true nature of the Center for Immigration Studies, proclaiming it "an independent, non-partisan, non-profit research organization."
In reality, CIS is an anti-immigration group. As the Southern Poverty Law Center details, CIS was founded by John Tanton, "a man known for his racist statements about Latinos, his decades-long flirtation with white nationalists and Holocaust deniers, and his publication of ugly racist materials." It's also not "independent" -- it was founded as the research arm of the anti-immigration Federation for American Immigration Reform and still has ties with the group.
So it appears that Caruba has found yet another subject to bamboozle his readers about.
Meanwhile ... Topic: Accuracy in Media
Right Wing Watch catches Accuracy in Media's Roger Aronoff claiming -- without proof, of course -- that there was a secret deal between the Obama administration and Comcast that it would ensure liberal bias at NBC and MSNBC in exchange for federal approval of Comcast's purchase of NBC Universal.
AIM Falsely Claims NJ Senate Candidate 'Has a Real Chance to Win' Topic: Accuracy in Media
James Simpson's Oct. 15 Accuracy in Media column on the New Jersey Senate race carries the headline "Steve Lonegan Has a Real Chance to Win."
Well, not so much -- Democrat Cory Booker defeated Republican Lonegan by more than 10 percentage points. Just like Newsmax's John Gizzi, Simpson ignored pre-election polls showing Lonegan behind by that amount or larger.
Also like Gizzi, Simpson made no mention of the fact that Lonegan's strategist and pollster was fired for making sexually suggestive comments about Booker.
Aside from the failed prognosticating, Simpson's column is a very thinly veiled bit of electioneering fof Lonegan. He implores readers to "Watch the video of Lonegan’s life story, and make up for the rampant media malpractice by spreading it around" and touts how you can "watch Lonegan clean Booker’s clock" in a debate. Simpson sneers that Booker "has the left fawning all over him nationwide because he is well-spoken, clean cut and black. Remind you of anyone?" Simpson concludes his column with a link to Lonegan's website.
Simpson's column runs dangerously close to partisan political advocacy, which is generally forbidden under the 501(c)3 non-profit status that governs groups like AIM. Hopefully AIM's lawyers reviewed this column before publication; otherwise, it could be in trouble.
AIM's 'Citizens Commission' Member Conspiracy-Mongers About Terrorist's Capture Topic: Accuracy in Media
Clare Lopez is one of the members of Accuracy in Media's "Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi." She doesn't appear to be a birther like several other commission members, but she's a supporter of the the MEK, an Iranian exile group that until recently was considered a terrorist group by the U.S. government.
Lopez is also prone to conspiracy-mongering, as an Oct. 7 AIM column demonstrates. In it, Lopez claims there's something suspicious about the timing of the U.S. capture of Al Qaeda operative Abu Anas al-Libi:
In any case, according to CNN, before the end of 2010, al-Libi somehow made his way back to Libya, just in time for the February 17, 2011 outbreak of the revolution. In December 2010, Libyan authorities even provided the UN Al Qaeda Sanctions Committee a street address for him in downtown Tripoli.
The August 2012 Library of Congress study, “Al-Qaeda in Libya: A Profile,” suggests that al-Libi’s role in Libya was coordination between Ayman al-Zawahiri and AQ Central and the Libyan militias.
By the time that U.S. career diplomat Christopher Stevens was named official U.S. Liaison to the Libyan rebels in mid-March 2011, AQ-LIFG fighters like al-Libi, Ben Qumu and Belhadj were leading the revolution against Qaddafi. Stevens’ job was to coordinate U.S. diplomatic, intelligence, logistical, military and weapons support to al-Qaeda jihadis such as these. The pending NYC Federal District Court indictment against al-Libi for the 1998 Nairobi Embassy bombing would just have to wait.
And wait it did … until a random day in early October 2013, when the U.S. government suddenly decided that it needed, urgently, to snatch an unsuspecting al-Libi off the street in Tripoli, where he had been living since the end of the Libyan revolution with his wife and four children.
Soon, Secretary of State Kerry was crowing about how terrorists “can run but they can’t hide” – but the thing was, al-Libi hadn’t been running or hiding for a long time. The U.S. knew perfectly well where he was for at least the prior two years — and didn’t seem to care.
Al-Libi’s seizure now makes as little sense as did the apparent U.S. and UK indifference to his outstanding Nairobi indictment and his jihadist credentials for all the years that preceded it.
The fact that Lopez is so quick to conspiracy-monger about al-Libi's capture is yet another sign that AIM's "Citizens' Commission" is nothing but a kangaroo court.
AIM's Kincaid Freaks Out About De Blasio's Name Change Topic: Accuracy in Media
What is it about New York mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio's name change that so unnerves right-wingers?
In an Oct. 10 Accuracy in Media column that mostly rants about deBlasio's supposed pro-communist past, Cliff Kincaid drops this in: "Curiously, it also turns out that de Blasio has had three different names, but he refuses to talk about that in any depth, either."
As we pointed out when the Catholic League's Bill Donohue freaked out about it at Newsmax, de Blasio has discussed his name changes -- he was abandoned by his father and taking the name of his mother's family is his way of honoring the side of the family that raised him.
There is an explanation, but Kincaid has no interest in finding out about it, preferring to construct a conspiracy theory about it instead.
AIM Thinks John Drew Is Trustworthy Topic: Accuracy in Media
Paul Kengor writes in a Sept. 27 Accuracy in Media column that he basically wants to give the House Un-American Committee treatment to President Obama, wanting to ask, "Has Barack Obama ever agreed with Marxist ideology?" Kengor continues:
I wrote a 400-page book on Obama and his mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, a literal card-carrying member of Communist Party USA (CPUSA no. 47544). There, I include transcripts of lengthy interviews I did with Dr. John Drew, who knew Obama at Occidental College in the early 1980s. Drew is completely credible. There’s no good reason to (at the very least) not take his account seriously enough for some follow-up queries.
Actually, there is a very good reason not to consider Drew to be credible: He really didn't know Obama.
As we've documented, Drew met Obama only twice in his life, both during social occasions, making it highly unlikely that he could have made such sweeping conclusions of Obama's purported nature based on a pair of brief, casual encounters. Further, some of Drew's details about Obama have been discredited by actual college friends of Obama.
I asked Drew if he believed Obama still believed some of those things today and, for the record, where and when and how Obama broke with some or all of that radical ideology. On that, Drew and I both speculated at length. Our mere speculation sent liberals into fits of blind rage. But it need not be that way.
If Kengor is talking about baseless speculation, he's correct. Drew is also on record as speculating that Obama may have been and/or may still be gay, which seems to further paint him as someone who is more interested in destroying Obama than telling the truth in a responsible way.
The fact that Kengor appears to have based much of his book on Drew's speculation about, and extremely limited contact with, Obama tells us that Kengor has an agenda as well.
AIM Columnist Mixes Anti-Intellectualism, Anti-Environment Ranting Topic: Accuracy in Media
Nicholas Guariglia uses a Sept. 24 Accuracy in Media column to rant about people smarter than he is:
None of this is to say climate change is not happening. It is to say, however, that if climate change is in fact happening, it may be due to heretofore unmeasured-and, in retrospect, somewhat obvious-”natural variables,” such as the behavior of the Sun. Nevertheless, President Obama is gearing up for a push of his anti-CO2 climate change agenda, this time by unconstitutionally using the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to bureaucratically enforce, through fiat regulation, what his administration cannot get passed democratically through Congress. And remember, this is the same EPA that spawned the outbreak of the once nearly-eradicated malaria by arbitrarily banning the insecticide DDT (to the silence of environmentalists, humanitarians, and journalists the world over).
This phenomenon-the trillions wasted by the IPCC; the millions dead because of the EPA-is the result of what can only be called “the credentialist fallacy.” The credentialist fallacy is a dogmatic interpretation of reality, one where greater importance is placed on an authority’s credentials than on its merits.
Meanwhile, Guariglia provides no credentials whatsoever to back up his pontifications, and boy, does it show.
Take, for instance, Guariglia's laughable claim that the EPA is responsible for "millions dead" because it banned DDT. First, the EPA could not (and did not) ban DDT use outside the U.S., and as we've documented, there was never a global ban on DDT usage.
Guariglia also conveniently ignores the fact that, as we've also noted, malaria-carrying mosquitoes were developing a resistance to DDT due to its overuse, reducing its effectiveness.
We would have examined Guariglia's arguments on the merits whether or not he has any credentials to speak of (which, again, he doesn't). And the merits of Guariglia's mix of anti-intellectualism and anti-environmentalism is decidedly lacking.
Guariglia later writes, "An ignoramus has no business arguing the periodic table with a chemist." As he has demonstrated, an ignoramus also has no business ranting about the environment.
AIM's Unhappy Its Benghazi Kangaroo Court Was Mocked Topic: Accuracy in Media
Roger Aronoff devotes a Sept. 19 Accuracy in Media column to complaining about how the Washington Post's Dana Milbank mocked AIM's "Citizens' Commission on Benghazi." Aronoff does his best to bolster the panel's alleged credibility:
Now take a look at the biographies of the people on the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi, people who Milbank delights in belittling: people like Clare Lopez, a long-time CIA officer. The commission also includes people like Admiral James Lyons (Ret.) and Retired Generals Tom McInerney and Paul Vallely. There are 13 of us altogether, including 12 who were either top CIA agents, or high-ranking military officers, collectively with hundreds of years of service to the security of this country.
And as we've documented, McInerney and Vallely are birthers, two of at least four birthers on AIM's panel. Lyons, meanwhile, is a conspiracy-monger who claims that the scandal involving an extramarital affair by David Petraeus was a cover for Benghazi. Most of the rest are either anti-Muslim, anti-Obama or both.
In short, hardly an objective panel. But Aronoff desperately wants you to believe otherwise.
And so does Cliff Kincaid, who uses his Sept. 20 AIM column to highlight how "speakers" at the "Citizens' Commission" kickoff "said that the scandal could implicate the President in illegal operations that are international in scope." That's a statement show that the panel expects to put partisan attacks on Obama ahead of any actual fact-finding.
Cliff Kincaid's Favorite Dictators Topic: Accuracy in Media
Cliff Kincaid has a new favorite dictator, and it's Syria's Bashir Al-Assad, credulously quoting everything he says and insisting that President Obama is the one with the credibility problem:
In his interview with Charlie Rose, Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad said there was “not a single shred of evidence” that his regime used chemical weapons. During his Tuesday night speech to the nation, Obama offered none. As the Associated Press noted, “President Barack Obama voiced his conviction Tuesday night that Syrian President Bashar Assad was to blame for deadly chemical attacks against civilians, but again he offered no proof.”
Assad said the Obama Administration “doesn’t have” the evidence. “If they had it, they would have presented it to you as media from the first day,” he said.
Obama also said on Tuesday that “The Assad regime has now admitted that it has these weapons, and even said they’d join the Chemical Weapons Convention, which prohibits their use.” The implication was that Obama’s threats forced the Syrians to make that admission.
In fact, Syria admitted having these weapons over a year ago, and pledged not to use them in the civil war. Syria’s then-Foreign Ministry spokesman, Jihad Makdissi, told reporters, “Any stock of WMD or unconventional weapons that the Syrian Army possesses will never, never be used against the Syrian people or civilians during this crisis, under any circumstances.”
Kincaid also quotes "Former CIA officer Larry Johnson" as claiming that “My friends in the CIA are still around and they are now warning me that both the United States and the United Kingdom know that Bashar Assad is not responsible for the incident on 21 August that killed and maimed Syrian civilians." But then, Johnson also claimed he had a Michelle Obama "whitey tape."
Kincaid followed that up with a column the next day bashing Obama for purportedly arming Syrian rebel "terrorists." Gut Kincaid made no mention of his stealth dictator crush, Assad ally Vladimir Putin of Russia. And Kincaid is certainly not going to mention how horrible he used to think Putin was.
AIM's Kincaid Takes Russia's Side on Syria Topic: Accuracy in Media
Cliff Kincaid's normal mode on Russia is to attack it. As recently as Aug. 27, Kincaid was ranting about "how the Russians play the American media—and some Americans—like violins" on the subject or Edward Snowden and how "Putin lied through his teeth about Snowden’s relationship with Russia and is now boasting about carrying out this monumental deception."
Kincaid seems to have a change of heart since then, for he's now on the side of the Russians in opposing U.S. intervention in Syria -- while trying to hide that fact from his readers.
Just six days later, in a Sept. 2 Accuracy in Media column, Kincaid was lashing out at "the dubious case for war" made by President Obama, declaring that "Obama is spouting a bunch of nonsense, and the media know it." Kincaid made no mention of the fact that Russia also opposes Obama's possible intervention in Syria.
The next day, Kincaid conceded that Syria's Assad regime is "backed by Russia and Iran," but insisted that the real issue is "the nature of the opposition, backed by the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the side of the conflict that Obama, McCain and Graham want the U.S. to support." He didn't mention Russia's opposition to U.S. intervention in Syria.
On Sept. 4, Kincaid wrote a column headlined "War on Syria Means Victory for Al Qaeda." Kincaid didn't mention that it also means victory for Russia (though he did seem to tacitly endorse Russia's new "legislation to protect children from homosexual propaganda").
A Sept. 6 column by Kincaid is headlined "O’Reilly Buys Obama Propaganda on Syria," but Kincaid doesn't explain how he has apparently bought Russia's propaganda on Syria.
AIM's Benghazi Crowdsourcing Is A Bust So Far Topic: Accuracy in Media
In promoting its little kangaroo court it calls a "Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi," Accuracy in Media is staging some sort of unspecified conference (which may or may not be a planned Sept. 16 gathering) that it claims will cost $5,000. To that end, AIM is trying to raise $1,000 from its readers through a crowdfunding site, complete with perks for large donations.
Though the campaign nas been up and running for nearly two weeks, AIM has yet to receive a single donation:
Perhaps its readers have realized how much of a kangaroo court its birther-filled "citizens commission" will be. Whatever the reason, it doesn't bode well for AIM or its commission.
Manning Inspires Transgender-Bashing At AIM Topic: Accuracy in Media
The gay-bashers at Accuracy in Media are at it again, this time freaking out over Bradley Manning's request to become a woman named Chelsea.
Daniel Greenfield fires off numerous remarks aimed at denigrating transgenders in an Aug. 26 AIM column:
After a great deal of fuss about national security and terrorism, sentence was passed and Bradley Manning, the man at the center of the storm who used a Lady Gaga CD to smuggle out classified information, announced that what he really wanted was to live as a woman.
Posting a photo wearing the least convincing wig outside of clown college, Manning announced that from now on, his name will be Chelsea.
Life might have been simpler for everyone if Manning had just gone straight to the bad wig. In the age of Obama, his right to pretend to be a woman would have been protected with more vigor than the lives of American soldiers serving in Afghanistan.
Every media outlet is now doing cheerful stories about some little boy being raised as an “Adorable Transgender Little Girl” by his Munchausen-by-proxy parents and the intolerant schools who won’t let him use the wrong bathroom.
Gender as a construct is one of those mechanistic progressive fantasies straight out of a Brave New World society where every aspect of human identity can be customized. Like most of the futuristic dystopias, it ends badly.
Bradley Manning betrayed his country for the same reason that he put on a blond wig; because he is mentally ill.
Not to be outdone, notorious homophobe Cliff Kincaid offered his own thoughts in an Aug. 26 column:
CNN’s story, “Chelsea or Bradley Manning: Addressing transgender people,” ignores the other alternative—he/she is simply a pervert who should have been booted out of the service years ago and should never have received a security clearance. The key question—not pursued by the media—is why Manning was allowed to remain in the Army when he was acting in violation of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” policy.
Manning will pay a price in prison, but those who permitted this to happen have still not been held accountable.
The media won’t remind us of this fact, but two previous NSA defectors to the Soviet Union/Russia, Bernon F. Mitchell and William H. Martin, were also perverts.
Mitchell confessed to “sexual experimentation with dogs and chickens,” according to the 1962 report, “Security Practices in the National Security Agency.” Mitchell, who had “associations with members of the Communist Party,” was “sexually abnormal,” had “posed for nude color slides perched on a velvet-covered stool,” and had “homosexual problems.”
Meanwhile, Kincaid -- wearing the hat of his own personal anti-gay/anti-commie group, America's Survival -- is calling for Fox News anchor Shepard Smith to publicly acknowledge that he's gay, presumably so Kincaid can bash him further. His little group has issued a 40,000-word report, authored by fellow homophobe Peter LaBarbera, warning about "Fox News’ Growing Pro-Homosexual Bias."