[4/27/06]

[Mac Johnson columnist] 12:09 am [permalink]
The O'Reilly Fiction: Apparently, my column for this week, "The O'Reilly Fiction," was taken as some sort of attack on Bill O'Reilly's loopy belief that high gas prices are the result of a worldwide "cabal" of evil corporations. Among those reading this meaning into my subtle and ambiguous article was a Mr. Bill O'Reilly of New York, who contacted me within hours of the article's publication to invite me onto his show to discuss his economic version of "The DaVinci Code." A spirited debate followed, video of which you can see at: http://www.macjohnson.com

The viewer and reader response following this interview was enormous, and the vast majority was wildly positive. I would especially like to thank those Mac Alert subscribers that happened to see the segment and wrote with their support. I would also like to thank Bill O'Reilly, who remains wrong, but is a stand-up guy and no shrinking violet. You have to respect that in a guy.

[4/26/06]

[Nick Winter-administrative editor - found in the ebag from Accuracy In Media] 12:02 am [permalink]
Give Back the Tainted Prizes; Urges Resignation of Post Pulitzer Winner Accuracy in Media is calling on the Washington Post and New York Times to return the Pulitzer Prizes they recently won for stories about the war on terrorism. AIM is also urging that Post Pulitzer winner Dana Priest resign from the paper for misleading the public about her "sources."

Priest's main source for her prize-winning story on CIA "secret prisons" has been exposed as a John Kerry supporter in the agency and former Clinton aide who contributed financially to the Kerry presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee. That source, CIA officer Mary O. McCarthy, was fired after she acknowledged illegally leaking classified information to Priest and other journalists.

As noted by AIM editor Cliff Kincaid in his column on the scandal, posted on the AIM website, Priest had publicly denied that her sources for the story included critics of the Bush Administration from within the CIA.

What's more, the Priest story has never been confirmed and the evidence indicates that the main essence of her story – that the CIA operated "secret prisons" abroad – is false.

Kincaid says the Pulitzer Prize given to the New York Times for the story about the NSA monitoring the international communications of al-Qaeda operatives here and abroad should be returned as well. He says the story was twisted in such a way as to suggest that ordinary Americans were at risk because of an illegal "domestic spying" program. There is absolutely no evidence that this is the case, he notes. The story, Kincaid suspects, was also based on CIA and other sources that were determined to undermine the foreign policy of the Bush Administration.

[4/25/06]

[Mediacrity] 12:01 am [permalink]
Recognizing Good News I see that Honestreporting today agrees with my assessment concerning the recent, historically unprecedented New York Times and Washington Post editorials on Hamas.

As I've said before, it's important to recognize the occasional good news coming out of these two horribly biased news outlets. However, while we are celebrating, it is important to undertstand why this is happening. It is not because the Times and Post have suddenly seen Hamas for it is. It is because

Hamas is too stupid and ham-handed to know better.

If Hamas were to start mouthing "moderate" platitudes in the Arafat manner, the media and particularly the Times will eagerly revive the long-discredited "myth of Palestinian moderation."

Count on it.[go to Mediacrity blog]

[4/24/06]

[Daniel Pipes - author, activist, tOR contributor] 12:01am [permalink]
America's Rude Islamists Steven Emerson reports on the Islamic Thinkers Society (ITS) rally yesterday at the Israeli consulate in New York, celebrating the bombing in Tel Aviv on April 18, killing nine. The event featured such slogans as:

Israeli Zionists What do you say? The real Holocaust is on its way

The mushroom cloud is on its way! The real Holocaust is on its way!

Israel won't last long… Indeed, Allah will repeat the Holocaust right on the soil of Israel

No wonder they call you sons of apes and pigs because that's what you are.

May the FBI burn in Hell
CIA burn in Hell
Mossad burn in Hell
Homeland Security burn in hell!!

Islam will dominate the world

This is potentially an important event, for until now, American Islamists have mostly been polite, pretending to be loyal, forging alliances, working the system. This approach sometimes wins them an earful from their more impatient colleagues (I noted one such missive at "Cut the Apologetics, a Muslima Advises CAIR"), but rarely and obscurely so.

The rally yesterday could mark a turning point, when U.S.-based Islamists begin to divide into two, the polite and the rude, those trying to curry favor and those not caring at all what non-Muslims think.

Were that they case, one could see this development as positive, in that it facilitates Americans' understanding the true nature of Islamism; or negative, in that it shows the burgeoning confidence of Islamists, who no longer think they must work within the system. I am inclined to see it the latter way.

[4/20/06]

[Mediacrity] 12:01 am [permalink]
The Hamas P.R. Miracle Continues The New York Times today delivered a lead editorial attacking Hamas. A perfectly good editorial -- one that underlines the point I've made in the past, which is that the Hamas takeover of the Palestinian government is a great thing from a propaganda standpoint.

As a matter of fact, I think that this perfectly reasonable (I'm amazed to find myself using that word) editorial contained a definite note of frustration. The Times, remember, is blatantly pro-Palestinian. So Hamas's endorsement of Monday's suicide bombing was not, in the view of the Times, simply immoral. It was "dimwitted."

It was almost as if the Times was saying, "Come on Hamas! Give us something to work with." Hamas won't play the hypocritical game, first begun by Yassir Arafat, of condemning terrorism while sponsoring it at the same time. These guys endorse terrorism while sponsoring it at the same time. Hey, that's honest! You got to give them credit for that.

You could see the agony over at the primary Palestinian terrorist mouthpiece in this country, the Electronic Intifada. There, of course, the bombing in Tel Aviv was a nonevent, and the lead article was (I must pause while I reach for my handkerchief), "Hamas is Being Forced to Collapse." Oh no!

EI reported that "the newly elected Palestinian government led by Hamas has already started to show an impressive level of pragmatism, however, Israel and the U.S. seem to not be interested."

Now, in the past, pap like this would ordinarily be found in the editorial pages of the New York Times and other newspapers. Today, you had to turn to EI to find the usual justifications and excuses for Palestinian terrorism. Even an obligatory op-ed in the Times on the Israel lobby was half-hearted and pro forma.

Even the odious BBC gnashed its teeth and reported that "Hamas's refusal to condemn the Tel Aviv bombing will have only reinforced the view of many in the West that the new Palestinian government must be treated as a pariah."

Oh, and whatever one might think of Ehud Olmert's reaction -- I tend to agree that it was inadequate -- you have to admit that, again from a strictly P.R. perspective, it was brilliant. No strong Israeli reaction to cloud the image of a Hamas government endorsing terrorism. The Israeli government, by pausing, let that image sink in.

So, onward, Hamas, with your "honesty is the best policy" policy. Say what's on your mind, guys. Don't be shy. And keep up the good work.

[4/19/06]

[Jim Kouri - columnist] - 12:05 am [permalink]
The Real Story: News Media Fall in Love with Generals Well, this was quite a week. Most notably, it was the week of the news media's newfound love for generals. Suddenly, the Washington press corps is lap-dancing for these warmongering men who command troops to go into battle and kill, destroy and annihilate.

And if you believe that, then you've been snookered by the left-wing press once again.

The mainstream news media have about as much love and admiration for our military's top commanders as they have for President George W. Bush and members of his administration. Unless, of course, the generals don't much care for Bush or his Defense Secretary. And what a bonanza! They've got six retired generals to blast away at Bush through his Secretary of Defense Don Rumsfeld.

Yes, folks -- count 'em -- six retired generals, some of whom led troops in Iraq, have spoken out against Rumsfeld in recent days, accusing him of arrogance, ignoring his field commanders, and micro-management. Usually the guy who's lower on the Totem poll perceives the folks above him or her as arrogant, so that's just an opinion voiced by most disgruntled employees. Ignoring his field commanders may be a good thing or a bad thing, so it depends on which side of the desk you're sitting. Micro-management? Have they forgotten the old adage? "War is too important to be left to the generals." Can you believe it? The left-wingers in the press actually want generals to have autonomy during a war.

It's not about what these has-been generals are saying. It's about the fact that they are saying it against Secretary Don Rumsfeld. The media love it because Rumsfeld makes them look like the Bozos they truly are during his press conferences. He's the alpha-man and they are the ladies and girlie-men of the press. Feminists and effeminate men have always despised real, tough men. They even have pejoratives to describe them: Neanderthals, Dinosaurs, Rednecks, etc. So if a former general makes negative statements about someone the elite media already hate, they will jump on the story like vultures.

When the New York Times tells me General Zini said Rumsfeld should resign, my reaction is, "So what? Who cares? Is my favorite movie "Patton" on the tube?"

The nation is being divided over this war and these blowhard former military leaders have nothing helpful to contribute to the situation. Let's be clear, we are talking about six former generals. Only six. For every one of them, I'll bet the farm the news media could locate 10 who would praise Rumsfeld. That is, if the news media really wanted to be unbiased.

I'm not saying he deserves praise, I'm merely pointing out that the media breathlessly reporting every syllable these retired men utter is worthless. It won't end the war. It won't create a viable Iraqi government. It won't help to bring our troops home. This is the epitome of arrogance: to believe one's words are powerful enough to bring about change without any further effort or action. Actually, I have more respect for the lefties who protest and march every chance they get. At least they're actually doing something. Here's another old adage: "Talk is cheap."

Sure, General Zini's soundbites will help General Zini sell books. But that's about all. Unless if the leftist media's goal in recording those soundbites is to further undermine the war effort. What better way to undermine a war than to turn the commanders and soldiers against their leader? It worked at the beginning of the Russian Revolution when the soldiers fighting the German during World War I turned on their top commanding officers and beat them to death with their rifle butts.

Am I defending President Bush and his minions? No. Not anymore. Bush lost me when he called the Minuteman Project vigilantes. He angered me when he talked about amnesty for lawbreakers from Mexico. And I turned my back on him when he became a full-fledged big-government liberal. I am not defending President Bush.

What gets my goat is watching and listening to six windbags who said nothing when it would have counted for something; who said nothing until they retired from the military -- pension and perks secured in their wrinkled hands. Besides, anyone who knows anything about the military knows it's not the generals who win wars, it's the colonels and top non-coms who deliver victories. Unless those generals are George Patton, "Chesty" Puller, and some other great leaders. Hear that Gen. Batiste? And Patton spoke out while he was still in uniform. It got him in hotwater with Eisenhower, but he had the courage to speak his mind.

[4/18/06]

[Mediacrity] 12:01 am [permalink]
Palestinian Terrorist 'Victims' in the Times Readers of the New York Times were treated weekend to what was (almost) a miracle! The Times ran on the front page an article on the victims of Palestinian terrorism. Imagine that. An article in the Times from the point of view of the victims, discussing their efforts to get redress. Not a single word excusing or "explaining" or justifying their acts.

A nice piece -- and, perhaps not coincidentally, a product of the metropolitan staff and not the notoriously anti-Israel foreign desk. However, the Times showed us elsewhere in the paper where its true feelings lie. The real victims are, of course, Palestinian terrorists!

The Times's loathsome Jerusalem bureau churned out a snotty little piece by John Kifner, a foreign desk oldtimer who used to work in the bureau years ago and is, apparently, working hard to re-establish his pan-Arab credentials.

In this piece, the world was turned back on its head again, with Palestinian murders now the "victims" of those heinous Israelis:

[4/17/06]

[Mac Johnson columnist] 12:09 am [permalink]
May 1 Is Conservative Shopping Day! As you no doubt know, illegal aliens and their handlers plan to hold their next Senate intimidation rallies on May 1, better known as the Marxist holiday of “May Day.” The May Day campaign will consist of yet more anti-law-enforcement marches and a nationwide “boycott” of shopping. The aim of the boycott is to demonstrate the purchasing power of the 11 million immigration criminals demanding amnesty. The boycott will also include a general strike by immigration criminals, who are being encouraged to skip work that day. Now it appears that illegal aliens are here to just skip the jobs that no American is willing to skip.

If the boycott and strike are successful, this means that May 1 will be A DAY WITHOUT ILLEGAL ALIENS! Lines will be shorter. Clerks will all speak English. Businesses that have been honest enough to hire legal residents will be poised to finally enjoy a competitive advantage! It will be morning again in America. Every actual American should make a point to get out and support those businesses and counteract the criminal boycott movement.

Spend like a congressman! Spend like George W. Bush! Heck, spend like Teddy Kennedy on a junket to a distillers’ convention. Spend in freedom and order in a mall or Wal-Mart near you. I hereby declare May 1 to be a national holiday -- Conservative Shopping Day.

Show the doubters that a day without illegal aliens is not a crisis, it’s just a good start. And spread the word. Forward this notice or send out your own. Let it be shouted, in clear unaccented English, from every mountaintop and blog: SPEND, GRINGOS, SPEND!

Lastly, be sure to make note of which businesses can still function on a day without illegal aliens, so that you can patronize them everyday for a long time. Let’s turn the day without illegal aliens into an everyday thing.

TO THE WAL-MART, COMRADES!

[4/14/06]

[Selwyn Duke - columnist] 12:02 am [permalink]
Bleeding America As you know, immigration has long been a huge sleeper issue and is now bubbling to the surface of American political discourse. However, as usual, the mainstream media is on the wrong side of the debate and suppresses the truth about our immigration woes as it carries water for the illegal immigration lobby. So, in an effort to provide a forum in which good Americans can present the facts on the ground, make contact with each other, discuss solutions and make proposals for activism, I have created a message board solely dedicated to the immigration threat confronting us. Its URL is: www.BleedingAmerica.com.

I would appreciate it if you would consider disseminating this information. We need to fight this fight with every fiber of our being.

By the way, the board is new and, assuming the response is adequate, I intend to alter it over time for the purposes of improving its appearance and increasing its impact.

Let's try to stop the bleeding, at BleedingAmerica.com. Participation is free, freedom is not!

[4/13/06]

[Matt Peterson - Claremont Institute] 12:03 am [permalink]
The Ryn/Claremont Debate Dr. Claes Ryn [Catholic University] says that Leo Strauss, Harry Jaffa, and Jaffa’s students are responsible for setting the intellectual stage for some conservatives to 1) embrace big government and 2) call for the universal exportation by force of a radical notion of democracy. In a previous post I simply pointed out that if Dr. Ryn is correct it is odd that Harry Jaffa and his students argue for limited constitutional government and against a radical notion of democracy and its universal exportation by force. Readers are free to decide the significance of these facts for themselves.

[4/12/06]

It is especially notable that yesterday, the day which Muslims throughout the world celebrate the birthday of the Prophet Mohamed, is the date when Iran's President selected to announce the entry of Iran into the "International Nuclear Power Club'.

Coming on the heels of the "Blessed Prophet" war games, where Iran showed off its new weapons, including a missile capable of carrying nuclear warheads, it is obvious that the selection of the date is intentional.

Iran has announced that it has crossed the threshold into the nuclear zone because it is now able to enrich its own uranium. True, enriched uranium can be used for peaceful purposes. But despite verbal claims from Iran's leaders that its intent is to not develop nuclear weapons, their actions and their words in Farsi indicate otherwise.

Iran has a long and rich history; western civilization owes much to early Persian history.

But Iran has not demonstrated to the world community that it has the maturity to handle such a power. Allowing Iran to have nuclear weapons makes about as much since as giving a 15 year old boy a Ferrari as his first car. Sure, he wants it. But there's a very high probability that he will wreck the car, and with a car that powerful, it's likely that someone is going to die.

During the ceremony when Iran's President announced that the enrichment milestone had been met, there were dancers on stage celebrating the announcement. The dancers performed beautifully, but according to state-run news agency IRNA in their hands they held vials of low grade uranium in their hands.

While the radiation danger was almost certainly negligible, the symbolism was clear.

Nuclear power is not a toy. Radiation is nothing to play with.

A nuclear Iran is frightening. Almost certainly today, in the capitals of Europe and the United States, a frantic discussion was getting underway about what to do in the wake of this latest announcement. Certainly there will be hawks calling for an attack on Iran, to defang its nuclear capability.

I can think of one very good reason for the US and Israel not to attack Iran at this time.

Iran wants us to attack them.

The last people who should be dictating the actions of the US government are the rulers of Iran.

[4/11/06]

[Mediacrity] 12:01 am [permalink]
The Times Softpedals a Lie: Way back in February, the New York Times published a completely unsupportable statement -- no let's call it what it was, a lie -- to the effect that Hispanics were used as "cannon fodder" in the military. Here's a link to the article, and here's exact quote:

"Critics also say that Latinos often wind up as cannon fodder on the casualty-prone front lines. African-Americans saw the same thing happen during the 1970's and 1980's, an accusation that still reverberates. Hispanics make up only 4.7 percent of the military's officer corps."

In a correction last week, the Times said as follows:

"An article on Feb. 9 about the military's recruitment of Hispanics referred incompletely to the belief of some critics that Hispanics in the Iraq war and blacks in the Vietnam War accounted for a disproportionate number of casualties. Statistics do not support the belief. Hispanics, who are about 14 percent of the population, accounted for about 11 percent of the military deaths in Iraq through Dec. 3, 2005. About 12.5 percent of the military dead in Vietnam were African-Americans, who made up about 13. 5 percent of the general population during the war years. The error was pointed out in an e-mail in February; the correction was delayed for research after a lapse at The Times." [emphasis added]

Well, at least the Times issued a correction -- which is more than it usually does when caught with its pants down, as I have pointed out time and time again. The Times also commendably noted that a "lapse" took place (and how) that prevented this boner from being fixed for two full months.

Still, I think the Times's handling of this was pretty creepy for a couple of reasons:

First of all, as is standard practice with many non-minor boo-boos, the Times stuck this gaffe in its "for the record" corrections space, which is supposed to be allotted to minor stuff like getting an address wrong or omitting a middle initial.

More importantly, the correction glosses over the editorializing in the piece, in which the reporter hid her bias behind unnamed "critics." Such "weasel words" are a violation of Journalism 101. What "critics" said that? If there were any "critics," they were spouting sheer bull.

Rather than point out this journalistic shortcoming, the correction accepts at face value that there were "critics" and says that the reporter "referred incompletely to the belief of some critics."

Excuse me. What happened was simple. The Times was wrong. The Times published a lie. This once-great newspaper's fast-diminishing credibility might be aided if it could occasionally use those two words when they are appropriate -- as they sure are in this instance. [go to Mediacrity blog]

[4/10/06]

[Jim Kouri - columnist] - 12:05 am [permalink]
War Vets' Lawsuit Against Sen. Kerry Heats Up; Taxpayers to Pay Kerry Legal Bills "Vietnam veterans will not be intimidated by John Kerry," retired Air Force Colonel George "Bud" Day said in response to the Massachusetts Senator's newly created legal
expense trust fund to finance his court battles against a group of highly-decorated Vietnam War veterans.

Col. Day added, "Why one of the wealthiest men in the Senate would expect others to pay his lawyers and use questionable Senate privileges against veterans is shameful."

Col. Day is chairman of the Vietnam Veterans Legacy Foundation (VVLF), a group of Vietnam combat veterans who sued Sen. Kerry for "conspiracy and defamation." Day is the most decorated Air Force veteran alive, a Medal of Honor recipient, a veteran of three wars and a former Vietnam POW held captive for over five years.

Sen. Kerry recently filed papers with the US Senate creating a "legal expense trust fund" to handle costs associated with his defense in the VVLF lawsuit. This action appears to be questionable since he's defending actions he undertook before he became a member of the US Senate and while he was running a presidential campaign which has nothing whatsoever to due with Senate business. Ironically, the account is named "Fund for Truth and Honor."

"That's his way of mocking us and all Vietnam veterans," Col. Day remarked. "The concepts of truth and honor are utterly foreign to him. He's forced to plagiarize our words."

The veterans' lawsuit stems from Kerry's failed 2004 presidential bid when his campaign tried to prevent a documentary about Kerry's 1971 anti-war activities from being broadcast on television and cable stations, or shown in theaters.

That film, "Stolen Honor: Wounds that Never Heal," included interviews with Col. Day and several other Vietnam POWs. The film documented Naval Reserve Lt. Kerry's portrayal of Vietnam veterans as "war criminals" before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Those accusations, the POWs said, were false, threatened their survival, and lengthened their captivity.

They also resented his use of the name "Genghis Khan" to describe the actions of the military. Senator Kerry is no different today. Recently, he said on national television that US soldiers "broke into Iraqi homes and terrorized women and children."

Shortly after the documentary's release in September 2004, Kerry campaign aides sued "Stolen Honor" producer Carlton Sherwood, a Pulitzer Prize and Peabody Award-winning journalist and decorated Marine Vietnam veteran. The lawsuits were followed by an assault on Sinclair Broadcast Group, which had announced plans to air the documentary. Kerry
campaign-inspired ad boycotts, stockholders' rebellions, and calls for FCC and FEC investigations eventually forced Sinclair to drop its planned airing of "Stolen Honor."

In August 2005 Kerry supporters filed two additional lawsuits against Sherwood and VVLF POWs, claiming they "libeled" Kerry and other Vietnam veterans by questioning whether they witnessed or participated in "war crimes and atrocities" in Vietnam. However, Sen. Kerry admitted to committing "atrocities" during the Vietnam War, but was never prosecuted by the military for his admissions.

In response to Kerry's attacks on these honorable men, the VVLF POWs and Sherwood filed a "conspiracy defamation" lawsuit against Sen. Kerry and one of his top campaign aides, Anthony Podesta. That suit charges Kerry and his campaign with scheming to censor "Stolen Honor," attempting to prevent the American public from hearing Kerry's true anti-war history and the consequences his actions had on the POWs languishing in prisoner camps, as well as other Vietnam veterans.

"We could not stand by while John Kerry used his underlings to sue us into silence," Col. Day explained. "We could not allow this man to keep his hands clean while his surrogates did the dirty work, suing me and my fellow POWs because we spoke the truth about him.

What truly irks Col. Day and his fellow vets is the fact that Kerry is having US taxpayers foot his legal bills stemming from his anti-war comments and actions.

"It's time he is held accountable. He must face those whom he falsely accused. It's time America sees this man for [what] he really is, and the great harm he has done to many brave soldiers."

(Special thanks to Colonel Bud Day, USAF (Ret.) for providing information for this post.)

[4/6/06]

[Jim Kouri - columnist] - 12:05 am [permalink]
Rep. Cynthia McKinney Actions, Comments Condemned by Police [Press Release] Representative Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) assaulted a Capitol Hill police officer and instead of apologizing and putting the incident to rest, she and her supporters began a smear campaign against the officer and against law enforcement in general, according to Jim Kouri, Vice President of the National Association of Chiefs of Police.

"Rep. McKinney first issued a statement that she supports law enforcement and then she decided to go on the offensive backed by America-hating celebrities Harry Belefonte and Danny Glover. She decided to use the race-card and even accused the Capitol Hill Police Department of using 'racial profiling,'" claims Kouri.

According to a report from the National Association of Chiefs of Police, in 2005, the nation’s law enforcement agencies reported that 59,373 officers were assaulted during the performance of their duties, and 16,563 of those officers suffered injuries as a result of these attacks. Personal weapons (hands, fists, feet, etc.) were used in 80.1 percent of the attacks. Firearms were used in 3.6 percent, knives or cutting instruments in 1.9 percent. Other dangerous weapons were used in 14.5 percent of the attacks on officers.

Rep. McKinney should have been arrested and handcuffed on the spot. She is not above the law. And her smearing and race-baiting is unconscionable.

Members of congress should be setting an example for the American people instead of punching police officers while they are performing their lawful duties. Rep. McKinney actions and comments should be condemned by all members of Congress including members of her own party.

"The Democrat Party seems hell-bent on censuring someone. Perhaps they should censure Rep. Cynthia McKinney or at least an investigation into her actions by the Ethics Committee is called for," says Kouri.

The National Association of Chiefs of Police is a 501 (c) (3) nonprofit, tax exempt, educational association of command law enforcement officers within the United States, its territories and military forces. - Jim Kouri, CPP is currently fifth vice-president of the National Association of Chiefs of Police.

[4/4/06 Tuesday]

[Mediacrity] 12:01 am [permalink]
Nothing Happened -- So It's Big News! One of the permanent features of the Mideast conflict is a massive contingent of Israel-based reporters, one of the largest in the world, most hostile to Israel and seeking out every excuse to cooking up a "story" -- sometimes out of nothing.

We saw that Sunday in a non-story that moved today on France's AFP news service.

" Israeli authorities have used rubber bullets and tear gas to break up protests during a routine transfer of Palestinian prisoners from a jail in the south, sources on both sides said," the story began.

But if you look a little further down, you see that the source of this "information" was "Palestinian prisoner affairs minister Wasfi Kabha." He went on to say that three prisoners were injured.

So far we have a very, very very minor story. But then we see that a spokesman for the Israeli prison administration saying as follows:

[4/3/06 Monday]

[Cliff Kincaid columnist] 12:05 am [permalink]
Invasion of Foreign Media Just as we were preparing to go to press with our AIM Report on the British media invasion of the U.S., the Washington Post ran a column confirming all of our fears. The March 12 column by David Pitts noted that public radio stations in the Washington, D.C. area are airing many hours of BBC programs, in place of the local programming that was once dominant. Pitts, who wrote for 15 years for the U.S. Information Agency-Voice of America, said that "it is disturbing that a foreign broadcaster has taken such a prominent role in U.S. public radio."

This is not because it is British. Rather, it's because BBC World Service Radio "is not funded through the general license fee that pays for BBC domestic radio and television in Britain," but through a special grant from the British Foreign Office. This is extremely important because it makes the BBC into a propaganda arm of the British government.

The implication of Pitts' point should be obvious. U.S. law prohibits the U.S. Government-funded Voice of America from being broadcast inside the U.S., because of the fear that the government would propagandize its own citizens. But the British government-funded BBC can be broadcast in the U.S. Why doesn't this constitute foreign government propagandizing of the American people? And why isn't this improper or illegal?

The Pitts column noted the BBC's left-wing, anti-American bias. He said conservatives complained that the BBC operated like the Baghdad Broadcasting Corp. during the Persian Gulf War. Pitts said that careful listeners "may have noted that negative stories about the U.S. presence in Iraq abound on the BBC World Service, while far fewer stories critical of British involvement there are aired. Perhaps that is because the U.S. presence in Iraq is far larger than that of Britain and concentrated in more volatile areas of the country. Or perhaps coverage is connected to the BBC's funding. In any case, should our local public radio stations be carrying programming of an organization that is funded by the British Foreign Office without also carrying an advisory for listeners?"

BBC will also be coming to America through Al-Jazeera International, the English version of the pro-Arab terrorist satellite channel. David Frost, formerly of the BBC, has joined the new channel, which is set to launch in the U.S. this year.

A group called the United American Committee has announced plans to protest the launching of the channel on April 30 at 12:00 Noon at the new Washington, D.C. offices of Al-Jazeera International at1627 K St., NW.

The group is urging people who can't make it to the protest to write, call, or fax your cable company and tell them that you will cancel your subscription if they carry Al-Jazeera International. [AIM]