ConWebBlog: The Weblog of ConWebWatch

your New Media watchdog

ConWebWatch: home | archive/search | about | primer | shop

Saturday, July 30, 2016
Obama Derangement Syndrome Watch, Supersize WorldNetDaily Edition
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Barack Obama’s allegiance to Islam appears to trump everything else he supposedly values. The killer Mateen shot up a homosexual club on “Latin Night,” but even the horrific deaths of blacks, Latinos and homosexuals is not enough for Obama to call out Islamists.

[...]

In the last seven years, Obama has put our country on the brink of financial ruin. He’s divided the races like no other president in history. He has made the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) agenda his most important domestic issue – equating it to civil rights for blacks. This past week Obama announced he was designating the area around the Stonewall Inn in New York City as the country’s first national monument to LGBT rights.

Obama has done his best to undermine the greatest fighting force in the world by using it as his personal social experiment laboratory and lifting the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy. He also lifted the ban on women in combat, despite the fact that some 92.5 percent of women in the military do not want to be assigned to combat units.

While he’s been preoccupied with covering up for Islam and advancing the homosexual agenda, the black-on-black murder rate in Chicago (his hometown) shot through the roof. On Father’s Day weekend alone, there were 54 shootings and 12 murders! Yet we’ve heard nothing from Obama, Loretta Lynch, or Democrats in Congress about this bloodshed.

-- Jesse Lee Peterson, June 26 WorldNetDaily column

I’m not going to suggest that some months ago, Obama got on his infamous phone and told a minion to cultivate a cell of riled-up black activists, get them armed and insert them into the protest that would be ready to go on the next occasion that the police shooting of a black individual found its way into the national news cycle.

But for all practical purposes, it might as well have gone down in precisely that fashion.

-- Erik Rush, July 13 WND column

The United States, Europe and the rest of the world is in violent upheaval. At home, fraudulently elected illegitimate President Barack Hussein Obama, along with with his black-Muslim friends like so-called Rev. Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, and Black Lives Matter allies, have finally succeeded in igniting a race war.

To add insult to very serious injury, President Obama refuses to use his powers as the commander in chief to destroy ISIS and other Muslim terrorists in a decisive way. The reason is obvious, and it’s time for people to just start saying it: The “Muslim King” does not want to go hard against his Islamic brothers and frankly, in my view, sympathizes with their quest to have allah reign supreme to further a worldwide caliphate.

[...]

So, I pose this question: How can the Muslim King be legally removed from office before he does even more irreparable damage in the next six months of his presidency? What would our Founding Fathers have done under these dire circumstances? I do not think that We the People can just sit back and hope for the best, particularly in light of the heinous terrorist attacks of the last weeks, the latest in Nice, France, and the race war Obama and his friends have caused to explode in Dallas and around the nation. Our lives and the lives of our loved ones are in mortal danger!

-- Larry Klayman, July 15 WND column

The man who is the American president, Barack Hussein Obama, jumped in quickly to decry the innocent victims but he continues to refuse to specify who the terrorists are and as always, he never, never makes any link between the terrorists and their Islamist religious beliefs.

He never uses the terms Islamist or Muslims, even when there is irrefutable proof that people of those believe are behind attacks of this kind – not only in France, but worldwide.

I don’t believe for a minute that Barack Obama is a stupid man, but I do believe that he is blinded by his beliefs founded in Islam. He was brought up in and around that faith, and he remains a believer, regardless of what he says he is now.

It is incomprehensible that a man who professes to be a “Christian” can constantly and consistently do things, say things and take actions that directly and negatively affect Christians and Christianity, in this country and worldwide, and yet never do or say anything that might even be slightly negative against Islam.

Given the atrocities perpetrated by Islamists across the world, the gruesome attacks and killings that we see more and more, it makes no sense that the leader of a world nation, a presumably well-educated man, can see all this and yet not have the courage to state unequivocally who is responsible.

Is he blind? Stupid? Stubborn? A liar? A traitor? Or is he really a Muslim bound to support that belief regardless?

Clearly, he’s not acting as a Christian, as an American, as a patriot.

Nor is he acting as an American president should according to his oath of office.

It’s also clear that what he is doing, or rather not doing, is hurting our country and the free world and putting every one of us in mortal danger.

-- Barbara Simpson, July 17 WND column

Whites thought electing a black president was going to make things better between the races, but Obama has turned that dream into a nightmare.

Shock is a temptation to hate, and hate is evil. Hate makes one subject to evil and paralyzes people in fear. This hate has rendered people helpless and ineffective in their efforts to stop Obama’s wicked agenda.

[...]

Despite the political season, the real battle is not political – it’s a battle of good versus evil. If Americans were to truly wake up to this reality, Barack Obama’s evil power over our nation would collapse in that instant.

-- Jesse Lee Peterson, July 17 WND column

I give both political and business speeches all over America, and all over the world. I know a great speech when I see and hear one. Obama’s speech last night at the DNC was masterful. It was one of the greatest political speeches I’ve ever heard.

There was one problem: It was 100 percent fiction, fraud and fantasy.

If it were given by any CEO in America at a shareholders meeting, or a press conference in front of the media, that CEO would face life in prison for fraud and misrepresentation.

Any screenwriter in Hollywood could have made it up out of thin air and won an Academy Award.

It could have been a speech written by Bernie Madoff.

It could have been written by Lucifer himself, to be delivered by the anti-Christ.

[...]

Obama himself is the psychopath, sociopath and ego-maniac who rules as a tyrant, by issuing executive orders, ignoring the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law, and making believe Congress doesn’t exist. Every word directed at Trump described Obama, Obama’s last eight years of rule and Obama’s voters.

Lucifer himself would be proud.

-- Wayne Allyn Root, July 28 WND column


Posted by Terry K. at 12:59 AM EDT
Friday, July 29, 2016
WND Takes DNC's Birther Bait Again
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Art Moore begins his July 27 WorldNetDaily article by stating, "It appears the Obama family just can’t get birth certificates out of their heads." Actually, it's WND who has that problem.

For the second time this week, WND took the bait on a oblique reference to birthers by a member of the Obama family at the Democratic National Convention in order to rehash its discredited "eligibility" conspiracy theories. And Moore goes full-bore on it:

Dozens of lawsuits were filed over that issue before and after Obama’s election in 2008, and, after pressure from Donald Trump and others, the White House ultimately released a document he said was his Hawaiian birth certificate.

The only law-enforcement investigation of the issue, conducted by Arizona sheriff Joe Arpaio, concluded the document is likely a forgery.

Ironically, it was Hillary Clinton who began the whole “birther” controversy by questioning Obama’s eligibility during the hotly contested 2008 Democratic race against Obama.

It’s not just Obama’s birth certificate that’s in doubt, but he also mysteriously has a Connecticut-based Social Security Number, despite the fact neither he nor his parents ever lived in the Constitution State.

As we've noted, that "only law-enforcement investigation of the issue" was a corrupt sham, with Arpaio's "cold case posse" populated with the like of biurther conspiracists like WND's own Jerome Corsi.

And, no, Hillary Clinton did not "begin the whole “birther” controversy by questioning Obama’s eligibility." As CNN and others have documented, the 2008 Clinton campaign did not pursue the issue, though diehard supporters filed the first lawsuits on the issue. The one organization that pursued the birther issue to ludicrous extents and beyond was the definitely-not-supported-by-Hillary WND -- which, of course, Kovacs fails to mention.

As for Obama's supposedly fraudulent Social Security number, the most logical explanation is that Obama’s return address was mistyped, the initial “9” typed as a “0” which would turn a Hawaiian zip code into one from Connecticut.

For an organization that (currently) insists the birther issue ended in "late 2011," WND sure likes to keep talking about it -- and taking the bait when Democrats bring it up.


Posted by Terry K. at 3:01 PM EDT
Thursday, July 28, 2016
WND's Farah Tries to Nick A Little Credit For 'Left Behind' Books
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah has a weird habit of making grandiose and dubious (and evidence-free) claims about his past -- for instance, that he marched with Martin Luther King and he was "literally working shoulder to shoulder" with Bill Ayers and Tom Hayden in his left-winger days.

In his  July 26 WND column eulogizing right-wing author and activst Tim LaHaye, Farah writes this:

Here’s one of my favorite personal recollections.

In a former life, I made a living collaborating on books with others – including people like Rush Limbaugh, Hal Lindsey, Greg Laurie and many others.

Tim and I had discussed doing book projects together, but we never did.

One day in 1994, I believe, I called Tim with an idea for a project that had been in the back of my mind of more than 15 years. I had discussed it with other partners over the years, but it just kept getting put off in favor of other book projects.

The idea was a book called “Left Behind.”

As I was explaining it to him on the phone, he interjected, “Joseph, you’re not going to believe this, but I just signed a collaboration agreement and a publishing contract for that very title.”

The rest is history, as they say.

The book and its many sequels went on to sell tens of millions of copies and remain on the New York Times bestsellers list for over 300 weeks.

I had waited too long to make the call.

That's a weird little attempt to steal a little glory from LaHaye upon his death. Note that Farah is somewhat vague about what exactly he's stealing credit for -- he's definitely claiming having come up with the title "Left Behind," and he's sort of suggesting he may have thought of a similar plot.

Then again, Farah's fighting against the imminent failure of the business model behind WND, so someone else's financial success probably looks quite appealing.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:50 AM EDT
Wednesday, July 27, 2016
WND Takes Michelle Obama's Bait On Birther Reference
Topic: WorldNetDaily

All the revisionism WorldNetDaily is trying to do in order to distance itself from the birther issue that defined the website for much of the Obama administration -- most recently, Joseph Farah was insisting the "eligibility" issue ended in "late 2011" even though that was the time when WND's Jerome  was working behind the scenes to sleaze the incompetent and dishonest "cold case posse" into existence -- can't hide the fact that WND will go birther given the right provocation. WND did so last month when laughably tried to redefine the term "birther" as someone who debunks the "eligibility" issue as opposed to its long-established defintion as someone who perpetuates the issue in the face of all that debunking evidence (you know, what WND did for years and continues to do).

When Michelle Obama made a passing reference to birtherism in her Democratic National Convention speech, WND got suckered in again. "MICHELLE OBAMA RAISES BARACK'S BIRTH-CERTIFICATE ISSUE" screamed the headline of Bob Unruh's article on the speech, and Unruh runs with it:

Michelle Obama focused on praising Hillary Clinton Monday night at the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia, insisting she was the only presidential candidate who could be trusted with the children of the nation, but she took a side trip down a path that raised old shadows.

She said one of her jobs in the White House was to teach her daughters “to ignore those who question their father’s citizenship or faith.”

She was referencing the challenges to her husband’s constitutional qualification for office as a “natural born citizen.”

Dozens of lawsuits were filed over that issue before and after Obama’s election in 2008, and the White House ultimately released a document he said was his Hawaiian birth certificate.

Get the book that blew the lid off Barack Obama’s past. “Where’s the Birth Certificate?” — now just 99 cents!

The only law-enforcement investigation of the issue, however, concluded the document likely is a forgery.

Of course Unruh won't tell his readers that the "only law-enforcement investigation of the issue" -- the Arpaio "cold case posse" is a corrupt sham, staffed by Corsi himself, that never had any intention to look at all evidence and was interested only in declaring the birth certificate a "forgery" despite never examining an actual copy of it.

WND destroyed what little credibility it had in spreading lies about President Obama, led by its full-birther, truth-free agenda, and being in a state of denial -- a state that continues to this day -- about how discredited it is. Until Unruh, Farah, Corsi and the rest of the corrupt WND crew come clean and tell the truth, WND will continue to lack credibility.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:56 AM EDT
Tuesday, July 26, 2016
At WND, DNC's Grieving Moms Are 'Activists' But RNC Ones Aren't
Topic: WorldNetDaily

One reason WorldNetDaily is in financial trouble is its aggressiveness in injecting right-wing political bias into its "news" articles. Take this July 24 WND article by Garth Kant, for instance.

Kant's point is to demean the mothers of children killed at the hands of police or other authorities. Each of his mini-profiles of all but one of the mothers contains a similar line; can you spot it?

  • "Brown’s mother, Lezley McSpadden, became a political activist."
  • "Fulton also became a political activist."
  • "Geneva Reed-Veal, Bland’s mother, became a political activist."
  • "Dontre’s mother, Maria Hamilton had become a political activist."
  • "Davis’ mother, Lucia McBath, calls herself an accidental activist."
  • "The dead girl’s mother, Cleopatra Pendleton-Cowley, has become a gun-control activist."

That's right -- as far as Kant is concerned, all of these women are "activists." For the one he doesn't apply the "activist" label to, Kant makes sure to note that she "wrote an endorsement for Hilary Clinton."

By contrast, he does not identify Patricia Smith, whose son died during the Benghazi attack, as an "activist,"' even her speaking at the Republican National Convention is clearly a form of activism.

Kant also talks about Idela Carey, whose "34-year-old daughter, Miriam Carey, was shot in the back and killed by federal officers near the Capitol after she made a wrong turn into a White House guard post, then tried to leave. " But in reality he's plugging the WND-published book he's writing about the incident, which WND has tried to exploit in an attempt to find any excuse to bash the Obama administration rather than any genuine interest in righting an injustice.


Posted by Terry K. at 4:12 PM EDT
Monday, July 25, 2016
WND Zombie Lie Watch
Topic: WorldNetDaily

One of the biggest zombie lies WorldNetDaily has refused to kill is the claim that President Obama's call for a "civilian national security force" meant that he wanted some type of police force or something other that what Obama meant (he meant the use of diplomatic "soft power" in international conflicts to complement military might). We first wrote about this in 2008.

Now WND "practical prepper" columnist Pat McLene takes a crack at reviving the zombie lie in his July 18 column. He repeats Obama's statement and immediately jumps to claiming that it meant Obama wanted a "federal police force," then tries to explain how Obama's words have been fulfilled despite the fact that Obama has never created said federal police force:

As an example, back in 2008, then-candidate Obama argued for a powerful well-funded federal police force. However when any supporter of Constitutional limitations called Obama on his desire, the SJWs attacked en masse, calling the questioner a (pick one) racist/tool of the NRA/ fascist/Nazi/all of the above. Oh, and a liar. Always a liar. “Oh yeah? Where’s his army? Where’s the federal police force? Nowhere … you racist, homophobic, sexist liar!!!”

And of course, by carefully defining and limiting the argument, the SJWs and their handlers were correct. They always are, when they use this tactic. Our government rarely goes for its desires in a single shot. Instead they’ve developed a much more subtle mechanism for achieving their goals.

They don’t make something illegal, they simply make it impossible. They don’t create a new thing, they simply task an old thing to new purposes.

[...]

So here’s how you give birth to a federal police force without calling it a federal police force:

  1. Find a situation where a police force has had a serious altercation with a protected minority class. Create that conflict if expedient.
  2. Mobilize the SJWs to attack those police forces as an “-ist.”
  3. Drum up protests, get op-eds written, have political fellow-travelers demand a federal investigation.
  4. Get or require the policing authority in question to admit a mistake or a wrong-doing.
  5. Begin a long and open-ended Justice Department investigation, usually with specific law enforcement officers under indictment.
  6. Appoint federal liaisons (read: controllers) to those police departments, and require those law enforcement organizations to receive training based on federal guidelines.
  7. Make sure all new agency hires fall within acceptable federal requirements for race, ethnicity, sex and sexual orientation.
  8. Finally, no matter what the result of the investigation shows, maintain all of the above, especially the “liaisons.”

Voilà! Another solid brick in the civilian national security force wall.

McLene's "SJW" references are about those "social justice warriors" right-wingersd like to obsess about, adding: "Barak [sic] Obama isn’t a social justice warrior. No, really, he’s not. He’s a social justice warlord. He uses regular SJWs to push his own agendas."

Somehow, McLene movves from this to a call to arm yourself to the teeth: "Get thee to the gun show right now. Head for the gun store and buy more ammunition, right now. Form a buyers club and buy in bulk. Right now. ... Past behavior is indicative of present intent, especially when a government is after your liberty. Get busy. Get armed for your self-defense. Get prepared."


Posted by Terry K. at 12:03 AM EDT
Sunday, July 24, 2016
WND Columnist: Obama Should Tell Blacks About 'The Benefits of Being Black'
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Blacks are much more likely than whites to have children out of wedlock, and black males are much more likely to skip out on the mother of their children than males of other races. Over 70 percent of black children are born out of wedlock, which is an express ticket to a life of poverty and a fast track to crime and incarceration.

Obama should say, “It is time for the black community to take charge and declare a war on illegitimacy. It’s also time for the black community to declare war on those individuals, organization and movements that want to capitalize on this violence and blame others for our problems that we create for ourselves.”

While Obama has experienced some of the negative aspects of the “black experience,” he never talks about the benefits of being black.

He should say, “If you are black and do well in school, you are much more likely to get a college scholarship than someone who is white. You are much more likely to get admitted to a college than a white guy with the same grades. You are much more likely to get a government grant to do a study or a loan to start a business than a white guy, and if you start a business, you are much more likely to get a government contract. All things being equal, as a racial minority, you are much more likely to be hired by a business over the guy who is lily white. Companies get credit for hiring a minority, any minority. They get no credit for hiring a white guy. So go out there and work hard in school. Achieve. Stop whining. The sky is the limit! You can even be president of the United States.”

Now that would be leadership, but a leader, sadly, Obama is not.

-- Jane Chastain, July 13 WorldNetDaily column


Posted by Terry K. at 7:43 PM EDT
Saturday, July 23, 2016
Farah Claims The Financial 'Existential Threat' to WND Is Over
Topic: WorldNetDaily

In early June, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah declared that WND faced an "existential threat" and begged for money from his readers. Well, apparently, the threat has passed for now.

At the end of June, Farah sent out another letter to WND's mailing list proclaiming the crisis over and explaining how hard it was to ask for help:

Earlier this month, I wrote a letter that was the toughest thing for me to do.

I knew our enemies would see it, too.

I hated to give them comfort. And, boy, did it ever.

But thanks to the amazing response from WND's most loyal readers, I can assure them that the imminent threat to our very existence and viability as America's most daring and courageous voice for liberty is behind us.

This letter is a lot easier to write, because you answered the bell. We're not completely out of the woods, but you have helped buy us some time, for which I am endlessly grateful.

Actually, we're pretty much the only ones who wrote about WND's financial issues (which we also did at the Huffington Post). Which means he has declared us his enemy. We're flattered.

Note that Farah does not mention how much money was actually raised from his begging effort, which would make it much easier for donors to judge whether WND's financial problems are, in fact, over. Such secrecy is not a good sign when you're begging for money from the public, but it's never a good thing if WND is apparently such a financial pariah that Farah can't find legitimate private investors or other conventional financing to keep it alive and must resort to public begging.

Farah then once again blames WND's woes on Obama:

All that, of course, is on top of the Obama economy, the ravages of which every reader is aware: The entire retail world is in turmoil. Digital advertising is way down. The book publishing world is topsy-turvy. All of these factors profoundly affect WND because they represent many of the ways we support what we do – which is to boldly bring you the unvarnished, not-always-pretty, but accurate and undistorted truth about what's really going on in this chaotic world of ours.

First, retail turmoil, digital advertising issues and a competitive book-publishing industry are not Obama's fault -- that's capitalism at work. (WND loves to blame Obama for capitalism working as intended.) As we've previously noted, online retail has been growing immensely overall, which means the more likely issue is that people don't want to buy what WND has to sell.

Second, Farah's claim that WND reports the "accurate and undistorted truth about what's really going on in this chaotic world of ours" is an undisputed lie. Just a few days ago, Farah told lies in his column. WND's lies are contributing to the chaos, not making things clearer. Again, Farah is weirdly proud of the fact that his website publishes misinformation, and even a press-release mill decided that WND was not “credible” enough to promote.

Farah followed that up with even more falsehoods about how it cares about the truth:

Despite the assault on our nation and world over the last eight years, I, like Donald Trump, still believe America potentially has a great future ahead – with the right kind of leadership and, even more importantly, with a return to God and the principles He set out for liberty and prosperity and blessing.

But for America to get there, it must hear the truth. And that's where WND comes in. Very simply, you cannot have a free country without a free press. It's not possible. Yet as you know, most of America's "big media" serve as little more than a government propaganda ministry. Even much of the "alternative media" are reluctant to cover some of the really consequential stories that – while absolutely vital to the nation – also come with a price tag for the news organization reporting them, in terms of threats, ridicule, boycotts, lawsuits and financial loss.

As I told you in my previous letter, we want to be around when Obama leaves office on Jan. 20, 2017, so we can be part of the national recovery process. And with the help you've already provided, we have more confidence we will be where we need to be.

Well, if WND didn't do things that cry out to be ridiculed -- for instance, employing falsehood-spreader Jerome Corsi, promote a bogus super PAC and refusing to admit its anti-Obama birther crusade was completely discredited -- Farah wouldn't have to fear ridicule.

Needless to say, Farah ends his letter with a plea for more money; he claims that a financiall stronger WND is "a blessing for America's future." Uh, sure.

Farah is blaming pretty much everyone but himself for the imminent failure of WND's business model with no evidence he's made any adjustments to it to compensate for WND's financial condition (except for the apparent elimination of WND's Jerusalem bureau, which died when Aaron Klein jumped ship to Breitbart).

Given that, any money readers send to WND is likely to disappear down a black hole without any accountability, not unlike that super PAC Farah promoted.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:10 AM EDT
Updated: Saturday, July 23, 2016 1:14 AM EDT
Friday, July 22, 2016
What Passes For A Fact-Slap At WND, Starring Scott Baio
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Bob Unruh writes in a July 19 WorldNetDaily article, under the headline "Scott Baio slaps MSNBC anchor with facts":

MSNBC host Tamron Hall lashed out at actor Scott Baio at the Republican Convention in Cleveland on Tuesday for what she clearly considers inappropriate social-media messages in the political arena, demanding to know whether they represent the “moral compass” that Baio wants to present.

But the confrontation clearly turned in an unwelcome direction for her when the “Happy Days” star cited President Obama’s “gun” quote.

That was in June of 2008, when Obama said, on the campaign trail, “They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy.’ If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun, because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”

Hall immediately denied Obama said that.

“That’s absolutely not true,” she claimed.

Baio had said, “You want me to be sweet and gentle to a man, a president, who says if they bring a knife to an argument, you bring a gun. That’s what President Obama said.”

He was right.

While Unruh repeats what Obama said as taken from a 2008 Politico article, that article conveniently omits the context of the statement. As FactCheck.org points out, the line -- obviously borrowed from the film "The Untouchables" -- was clearly made in the context of warning donors that the general election campaign against McCain could get ugly.

Of course, the whole point of Unruh playing up an eight-year-old, out-of-context quote by Obama is to distract from he delightfully underdescribed as "Baio’s tweet regarding Michelle Obama featured an unflattering image of her, with the reference to what Barack Obama wakes up to." Unsurprisingly, Unruh didn't supply a link to Baio's tweet or embed it in his article so his readers can judge what it really is:

Unruh offers no criticism of Baio's tweet, which we can assume to mean that he and WND approve of its message.

While Unruh couldn't be bothered to place Obama's statement in context, he makes sure to do so with one by Trump:

Hall retaliated with a Donald Trump quote.

“The person that you support, the person that you support – the person you support said, he could take a gun out on Fifth Avenue and shoot someone in the head, and you would still support him. Is that true?”

Baio answered that Trump did say that, but then questioned Hall about Obama’s statement.

Actually, Trump’s comment, during a campaign rally in Iowa on the subject of how loyal were his supporters, was that he could “shoot somebody and not lose any voters.”

Then again, Unruh doesn't want to report facts -- he wants to distract from them. You can't slap facts you're trying to bury. No wonder WND has no credibility.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:26 AM EDT
Thursday, July 21, 2016
What Is WND's Farah Lying About Today?
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Joseph Farah has never been terribly interested in reporting the truth, which is one reason why he had to beg for money to keep his website, WorldNetDaily, alive. Farah's disdain for facts continues in his July 19 column explaining why blacks should vote Republican.

Lie No. 1:

You’ve heard of the Ku Klux Klan?

It was the military wing of the Democratic Party for 150 years.

The KKK was founded in 1866, meaning that Farah is claiming it's the "military wing of the Democratic Party" right now.

Additionally, the KKK was not a creation of the Democratic Party. According to PolitiFact, "historians generally agree it was founded by a handful of Confederate veterans in Pulaski, Tenn. as a social fraternity and it quickly changed into a violent group that terrorized newly empowered black and white Republicans in the South."While many angry Southern whites during the 1860s and 1870s were Democrats and a smaller number of them joined the KKK, that doesn't make the KKK a Democratic creation.

While Farah goes on to rant about the Democratic Party's racist past, PolitiFact popints out that "It should also be noted that the anti-black Democratic Party of the 1860s and 1870s bears no similarity to the party of today."

Lie No. 2:

The worldview of the Democratic Party is still responsible for victimizing blacks and systematically reducing the population of African-Americans in a number of ways – albeit more covertly.

First, the Democrats’ friends in Planned Parenthood target black and minority communities for abortions.

In fact, NPR points out that 60 percent of Planned Parenthood clinics are in majority-white neighborhoods, and that the percentage of Planned Parenthood patients who are black is roughly the same as the American populaton as a whole.

Lie No. 3:

In addition, who is it that promotes the doctrinaire teaching of Darwinism in American schools and universities? The Democrats, who insist evolution is not a theory, but a fact. What are the ramifications of that?

It was Darwinism in the 19th century that promoted the notion of superior and inferior races – and justified the genocide that led directly to the Holocaust. (See from “Darwin to Hitler,” “Darwin’s Racists: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow,” “The Darwin Effect” and “The Dark Side of Charles Darwin.”

Who’s defending Darwinism today? Only one political party – the Democrats.

As we've previously documented, what is now known as social Darwinism -- which, taken to its extreme, became eugenics -- is not Darwinism and actually preceded Darwin.

Farah's wearing out our "liar" image. We may have to build a new one if he keep up his pattern of falsehoods.


Posted by Terry K. at 2:14 PM EDT
Wednesday, July 20, 2016
WND's Muslim Derangement Syndrome, 'Islamic Zombie Apocalypse' Edition
Topic: WorldNetDaily

The current edition of WorldNetDaily's barely relevant Whistleblower magazins carries the theme "Killing Jihad," but appears to be your typical right-wing Muslim-hating -- assuming that all Muslims are terrorists -- and Obama-bashing, to judge by the WND article promoting it:

Almost 15 years after the horrendous 9/11 attacks and the ensuing “war on terror,” waged at a cost of thousands of American soldiers’ lives and trillions of dollars, America is losing that war.

Today, Islamic jihad is a bigger problem for Americans than ever. With terror attacks on the homeland coming with increasing frequency and ferocity – the worst massacre since 9/11 occurring recently in Orlando – polls show neutralizing terrorism is at the top of most Americans’ priorities.

Although President Obama and his former secretary of state and chosen successor, Hillary Clinton, live in a state of perpetual denial as to who is our enemy and how to defeat it, most Americans have managed to cut through the politically correct fog and finally see their enemy for what it truly is: an ultra-violent worldwide religious cult totally bent on global conquest.

While Obama pretends the threat doesn’t exist, he ironically created its most virulent and dangerous manifestation – ISIS – by ignoring top military advisers and recklessly pulling all American troops out of Iraq. And he has been fueling ISIS ever since by refusing to attack it with anything resembling a serious strategy.

As ISIS boasts in a recent recruiting video: “[The Islamic State’s] territory is already greater than Britain, eight times the size of Belgium, and 30 times the size of Qatar!” Indeed, the apparent success of ISIS’ self-proclaimed caliphate is attracting wave upon wave of “radicalized” young converts, male and female, from around the world, including America.

And yet there is hope. Obama’s time is coming to an end (unless Hillary Clinton is elected, which most believe would amount to a third and possibly fourth Obama term). On the other hand, Donald Trump insists that as president he would stop the endless flood of immigrants into the U.S. from terror hotbeds and would lead America’s allies in seriously engaging, militarily and in all other ways, the jihadist enemy and defeating it.

How deranged is this magazine? Here is the actual title of one of the articles:

“The Islamic zombie apocalypse: Understanding how ‘radicalization’ works – and how to prevent it” by David Kupelian

The article is even promoted in the upper left of the cover.

So apparently Muslims are zombies now. We had no idea.

Posted by Terry K. at 4:12 PM EDT
Updated: Thursday, July 21, 2016 1:19 AM EDT
WND Anti-Vaxxer Promotion Update
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily has long been an opponent of vaccines, a promoter of discredited anti-vaxxer activists and blithe to the danger unvaccinated people pose to the public at large.

WND does this again in a July 15 article by Bob Unruh, who begins by devoting the opening seven paragrpahs to rehashing WND columnist Barry Farber's enthusiastic touting of an anti-vaccine film made by discredited doctor Andrew Wakefield, who ultimately lost his medical license for conducting a fraudulent, unethical study claiming that vaccines cause autism.

This, by the way, has nothing whatsoever to do with the ostensible subject of Unruh's article, which tells you all you need to know about just how anti-vaxxer WND is.

The rest of the article is Unruh rewriting a press release by the right-wing Thomas More Law Center about the case of a Michigan woman who objected to vaccinating her children on religious grounds since some are descended from the cells of aborted fetuses. Neither Unruh nor the Thomas More Law Center make clear whether the woman objects to all vaccines on those grounds or just the few that actually are -- Unruh is in stenography mode and isn't curious about finding out things that weren't in the press release. But if Unruh had bothered to read the complaint the law center filed, it states tha the woman's "personal religious beliefs also oppose all vaccines, even those that are not manufactured from aborted fetal cells, because she believes that the body is God’s temple and injecting it with chemicals that permanently alter the body violates the will of God."

The center of the complaint is about a fact sheet used by Michigan officials to claim that no religion opposes the use of vaccinesand claimed that Pope Benedict said that, according to the law center, "parents who chose not to give vaccines derived from [aborted fetal] cells would be in ‘more proximate cooperation with evil’ than those who gave their children the vaccines in question because of the life-saving nature of vaccines." Unruh responds, dutifully transcribing the Thomas More Law Center:

However, it said Pope Benedict never made such a statement.

“‘Moral Reflections,’ the Vatican document produced on vaccines containing the cells of aborted children by the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life, also did not contain any condemnation of parents who refuse to vaccinate, especially not the MDHHS characterization of parents who do not vaccinate their children as ‘evil.'”

But neither Unruh nor the law center state what exactly the pope said about vaccines. According to the statement by the pope, "there is a grave responsibility to use alternative vaccines" that did not involve aborted fetal cells "and to make a conscientious objection with regard to those which have moral problems." But he also stated that for those vaccines available only through fetal cell lines, the public good must also be considered:

As regards the vaccines without an alternative, the need to contest so that others may be prepared must be reaffirmed, as should be the lawfulness of using the former in the meantime insomuch as is necessary in order to avoid a serious risk not only for one's own children but also, and perhaps more specifically, for the health conditions of the population as a whole -- especially for pregnant women

The lawfulness of the use of these vaccines should not be misinterpreted as a declaration of the lawfulness of their production, marketing and use, but is to be understood as being a passive material cooperation and, in its mildest and remotest sense, also active, morally justified as an "extrema ratio" due to the necessity to provide for the good of one's children and of the people who come in contact with the children -- pregnant women. 

While the pope did counsel against vaccines descended from aborted fetal cells, he did not issue a blanket prohibition against them and he did not forbid the use of vaccines not created using that method. The Thomas More Law Center -- and, thus, Unruh -- is not being completely honest in their defense.

The irony is that WND and the law center are promoting this case while there is a sizable measles outbreak occurring in Arizona, the spread of which is being driven by people who have not been vaccinated. Indeed, measles outbreaks in recent years have been driven by the unvaccinated. Whoops.


Posted by Terry K. at 1:00 AM EDT
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
WND Censors Baton Rouge Shooter's Links to Sovereign Citizen Movement
Topic: WorldNetDaily

WorldNetDaily knows how to pander to the fears of its audience: make black men, especially if they've committed horrible crimes, as scary as possible with as many trigger buzzwords as possible, like "Islam."

Here's WND began its initial, unbylined story on the alleged shooter of police officeers in Baton Rouge, La.:

The shooter who gunned down three Baton Rouge law-enforcement officers and injured three more has ties with the Nation of Islam.

Gavin Eugene Long of Kansas City, Missouri apparently coincided his 29th birthday – July 17, 1987 – with his rampage. In his extensive online presence, which included tweets, self-published books, YouTube videos and a website, he said he was once a member of Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam, but said he had no affiliations with outside groups.

[...]

However the Daily Caller reports YouTube videos on Long’s account show that he was a former Nation of Islam member. He also ranted against “crackers” and made references to Alton Sterling, the black man killed by police in Baton Rouge on July 5. Phone numbers on buildings in the video show that it was filmed in Baton Rouge.

Yes, WND would like you to think Long was an Islamic terrorist, even though he really isn't.

Bob Unruh reinforces the meme in a July 18 follow-up article that begins, "The Nation of Islam-linked Gavin Eugene Long, dead after a weekend shootout with Baton Rouge, Louisiana, police officers in which he allegedly killed three and injured three more, was 'targeting' law enforcement, according to a report today." Unruh also dutifully repeats that Long claimed he had been "a Nation of Islam member."

But WND won't tell you about a more relevant affiliation that's much closer to WND's heart.

The Kansas City Star reported that Long was a member of the sovereign citizen movement, extremists who don't recognize the authority of the federal government. Long had filed sovereign citizen documents in Kansas City -- saying he was with the United Washitaw de Dugdahmoundyah Mu’ur Nation, Mid-West Washita Tribes, a sovereign group -- and reportedly had a sovereign-related card on him when he died in a police shootout.

WND has long been symathetic to the sovereign citizen movement. In 2009, WND managing editor David Kupelian complained about increased governemnt scrutiny of conservative groups that are "Christian, patriotic, gun-rights, pro-life, sovereignty and so on." He suggested that the Obama administration was trying to provoke sovereign citizens and other right-wingers into committing violence to justify "a massive official crackdown on 'domestic terrorists' and a severe assault on freedom in America."

In 2013, it tried to deny the FBI's assertion that sovereign citizens can be violent, and it also tried to whitewash the tax-related crimes of a creationist pastor who was also a sovereign citizen activist.

WND tried again in 2015 to deny sovereign-citizen violence, distorting a governement report on the sovereign citizen movement to falsely claim that "The Obama administration has named a national security threat it believes is more dangerous than even the Islamic State terrorists beheading, crucifying and burning innocent human beings: Right-wing extremists." WND columnist Pamela Geller screeched that through the report, "Obama and his appointed thugs have made the good guys the enemy." Um, no, Pam, sovereign citizens who murder cops are not "good guys."

And not too far from Baton Rouge, two sheriff's deputies were killed in a shootout with sovereign citizens in 2013.

So WND is a lot closer to the views of Gavin Long than it wants you to believe. Do Joseph Farah and Co. have the guts (and journalistic integrity) to tell their readers that? (Highly unlikely.)

UPDATE: In a brief, sudden outbreak of journalism, CNSNews.com's Melanie Hunter reported that Long "considered himself a 'sovereign citizen,' part of a group that believes government and law enforcement does not hold any authority, which the FBI considers 'a domestic terrorist movement.'" What say you, WND?


Posted by Terry K. at 12:12 AM EDT
Updated: Tuesday, July 19, 2016 9:38 AM EDT
Monday, July 18, 2016
WND Tries to Add to Bogus 'Clinton Body Count'
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Not only is WorldNetDaily trying to revive the discredited "Clinton body count" as a way to attack Hillary Clinton, it's actively trying to add to the list.

Bob Unruh writes in a June 29 WND "news" article:

A former United Nations official, John Ashe, has been found dead in his New York home, and some are speculating whether it’s a case of “Hillary Clinton silencing people who ‘know too much.'”

That question was pointedly raised by Kosar at the Political Insider on word of the death of Ashe, who was found at his Dobbs Ferry, New York, home last week.

The cause of death was reported as a heart attack, but the New York Post reported the local Dobbs Ferry police said “his throat had been crushed, presumably by a barbell he dropped while pumping iron.”

“The death by barbell of disgraced U.N. official John Ashe could become a bigger obsession for conspiracy theorists than Vince Foster’s 1993 suicide,” the report by Richard Johnson said.

It’s because Ashe was scheduled to testify in just days with Chinese businessman and co-defendant Ng Lap Seng, who was accused of smuggling $4.5 million into the U.S. and lying that it was to buy casino chips and more.

The New York Post said Ng earlier was identified in a 1998 Senate document “as the source of hundreds of thousands of dollars illegally funneled through an Arkansas restaurant owner, Charlie Trie, to the Democratic National Committee during the Clinton administration.”

“One source told me,” Johnson wrote, “‘During the trial, the prosecutors would have linked Ashe to the Clinton bagman Ng. It would have been very embarrassing. His death was conveniently timed.”

Yep, Unruh is treating some random conspiracy theorist as credible. And since he's doing that instead of doing any actual investigating of the claim, he's promoting false information. Snopes, by contrast, did bother to look into things, and here's what they found out:

We contacted the U.S. District Attorney for the Southern District of New York to verify the claims about Ashe and Clinton. According to the individual with whom we spoke, CNN's report that Ashe's corruption trial was set to begin just five days after his death was not accurate: Ashe was only scheduled to attend some standard pre-trial meetings in the following days.

Moreover, the U.S. District Attorney's spokesperson told us that no portion of Ashe's court case pertained to Hillary Clinton. Not only was he not set to testify against Clinton five days before he died, neither was he slated to do so at any point during the trial.

Promoting discredited, politically motivated conspiracy theories is just one more reason why WND is not credible.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:05 AM EDT
Sunday, July 17, 2016
WND Columnist Builds Another Column Around A Chain Email
Topic: WorldNetDaily

Ben Kinchlow really needs to stop copying and pasting into his columns what he sees in Internet chain emails.

Kinchlow did this a few months back. Now he's at it again in his July 3 WorldNetDaily column (italics his):

It has been proven scientifically that a vacuum cannot exist in nature. If American citizens do not participate in their political system, a republic, then a vacuum is created and government of the people will be replaced with government over the people.

More than 200 years ago, it is asserted that an historian named Alexander Tytler bemoaned the fact that the “American way of life” might not long endure. His reasons were chillingly accurate:  “[P]eople will invariably hand over their sovereign responsibility and freedom to the government that promises the most benefits…”

He continued, “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority only votes for candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result, a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by dictatorship.”

Does any of that sound familiar?

Why, yes, it does, Ben. It's been floating around right-wing chain-email circles for years.  Heck, we wrote about it back in 2004, and it had been around since 2000.

Kinchlow didn't repeat most of the falsehoods around this purported quoting, getting it correct that the statement is attributed to "an historian named Alexander Tytler." Had Kinchlow bothered to dig a little deeper -- say, a visit to Snopes, which we made in 2013 when CNS columnist Alan Caruba repeated it -- there's no evidence Tytler actually wrote such a thing.

A little more digging from someone who actually dug into it (Loren Collins, the guy who also discredited Joel Gilbert) shows that the quote appears to date back only to 1943, when industrialist Henning Webb Prentis Jr. said it in a speech.

Nevertheless, Kinchlow goes on later in his column to repeat the cycle of society quote typically attributed to Tytler -- "from bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual fate to great courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to complacency; from complacency to apathy; from apathy to dependency; from dependency again into bondage" -- and attributes it directly to him. But this too apparently is also from Prentis' speech.

If WND cared anything about editing, they would have alerted Kinchlow to his error. But they don't.


Posted by Terry K. at 12:57 PM EDT
Updated: Sunday, July 24, 2016 4:00 PM EDT

Newer | Latest | Older

Bookmark and Share

Get the WorldNetDaily Lies sticker!

Find more neat stuff at the ConWebWatch store!

Buy through this Amazon link and support ConWebWatch!

Support This Site

« July 2016 »
S M T W T F S
1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31

Bloggers' Rights at EFF
Support Bloggers' Rights!

News Media Blog Network

Add to Google