Amazing!
I am sure that when State Senator Neal Tapio proposed his bill and secured a hearing on it—a bill to slow refugee flow from certain countries to SD—he couldn’t have envisioned how that failed bill has now exposed so much about the fearful ‘leaders’ and the dishonest media in that state….
….’leaders’ who apparently aren’t afraid of jihadists, but of the power of BIG Business (like the meatpackers who want the cheap labor and call the shots) and Chamber lobbyists.
Did the newspaper there also bow to BIG MEAT power, or was it the Chairman of the committee who pressured the newspaper to change its story on the hearing in less than an hour? Chairman, Republican Senator Bob Ewing was clearly embarrassed when Hohmann said “you don’t want to hear the truth.” My guess is that he called the Argus Leader and had the original story taken down! Just a guess on my part! How fortuitous it was that Leo Hohmann, James Simpson and Phil Haney were all there to see it first hand.
They knew the local Argus paper had reported fairly in the first few minutes after they testified only to see that story removed and replaced (except for the url, LOL!) within the hour. So Senator Tapio didn’t get his bill advanced out of committee, but in fact gained much more in the fight to save western civilization. He exposed the feckless leaders in the legislature and the media’s dishonest complicity with them.
Be sure to see my two previous posts on Hohmann’s reports here andhere. (See the weak women ‘leaders’ selling us out!)
Then here is today’s newson how newspapers worldwide are doing the bidding of the global elites and attempting to reduce the natural and sensible resistance people have to being taken over by literally alien cultures.
A very disturbing story appeared in the European press this week that should concern all of us on this side of the Atlantic.
Stick with me while I explain why.
According to the Times of London, concerns have been raised about an “ethically dubious deal” between the government and national newspapers that involves journalists writing positive pieces about the Ireland 2040 plan.
The government’s “strategic communications unit” arranged for sponsored content to appear in local, regional and national newspapers including the Irish Independent and The Irish Times.
What is the Ireland 2040 plan, you ask?
It’s a €116 billion national development plan to prepare for an estimated population growth of one million people over the next two decades.
And where is this population growth going to come from, since Irish women have stopped having babies, as evidenced by their paltry 1.7 children per woman fertility rate?
More…
So how does this relate to South Dakota, continue reading here(I don’t want to give it all away).
But here is a hint, the (second) story the Argus Leaderreported about the Tapio bill hearing is entitled:
Citing concerns of discrimination, S.D. panel shelves refugee resettlement ban
But the url still shows what the original title was:
Hohmann had told the chairman of the committee something he didn’t want to hear (there were audible gasps in the hearing room) and you can see it in the url above.
“You don’t want to hear the truth!”
Read the full accountat LeoHohmann.com.
It is happening all over the world! But, unless you are carefully monitoring your media, you would never know! (Real) leaders looking for something to do?
Craft bills and resolutions even if you know they won’t go anywhere, but do it to expose your weak elected officials and your dishonest media like this bunch in South Dakota.
For more on South Dakota, you might want to visit my archive on the statehere. It is a state I visited in the summer of 2016 on my tour of western states where BIG MEAT rules!
Editor: Occasionally we post guest comments/opinion pieces from readers. This, below, is a comment a resident of Minnesota posted at this story last week:
Before you read Bob Carrillo’s comment, you might want to visit Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch yesterdayabout Republicans and Dems (pandering!) in the Minnesota state legislature by proposing to give nearly $20 million in taxpayer dollars to Somali community development (because of course we all know that poverty produces Islamic terrorists—NOT!).
(This post will be filed in my ‘What you can do’category—don’t be afraid to speak!)
From Bob Carrillo (highlighting is mine):
This week (Tuesday 2/6) was caucus week in Minnesota.
Two nights ago, I found myself compelled to call in to a local radio talk show host (Walter Hudson) (IHeart Radio 1130 AM – “Closing Argument”).
He was interviewing Mr. Phillip Parrish, a fairly straight laced, no nonsense, gubernatorial candidate for the State of Minnesota; a personality and intellect sorely need here in the land of Minnesota denial…
Walter Hudson is on the right. https://www.iheart.com/podcast/closing-argument-with-walter-hudson-28270545/
I was not particularly pleased with the tenor of the dialogue exchange by Mr. Hudson. He claims to be a conservative. However, in Minnesota, as true in many places in the country, what passes for a republican, or even a common sensed based conservative leaves many of us adults in the room wanting. In short, and with very few exceptions, Minnesota has become a breeding ground for adult-children posing as conservative thinkers, and RINO’s.
In any event, I was compelled to call in to Mr. Hudson’s radio program.
Needless to say the discussion, and exchange between myself and Mr. Hudson did not come off very well…at least from his end I believe.
After posing the following question to him, and citing a number of horrible examples of atrocities committed by radical Islamist’s in Minnesota, some resulting in the maiming and even death of Minnesota citizens, as absolute proof that this is not simply some ethereal debate relating to the differences between religious and cultural factions in Minnesota at all.
Using those pesky circumstances called FACTS, I attempted to make my case, in opposition to his wishful thinking (or not) approach to Minnesota’s growing and deadly problems, Mr. Hudson did his level best to deflect and to derail our discussion at every turn.
While attempting to bring the hostility level down several times during the conversation, it was clear to me that he had no intention of allowing me to get past his all-over-the-top, and emotionally driven ranting. …He was upset.. So upset, that even after he dismissed me just prior to a hard break, he referenced me personally a few times during the next hour (segment) of his program in a less than respectful manner. Since I used to host my own weekly radio talk show program for eight years, I found his tone and demeanor to be incredibly unprofessional and disrespectful.
To my initial question: Can you point to any place on the planet where this “social justice” experiment, which involves this clash of cultures (one of which, literally refuses to assimilate by intent and by design), has worked well for the indigenous people of that place, OR has not ended badly???
Where, in Europe, Australia, or in the US and Canada is the “group hug approach”, and philosophy of appeasement (COEXIST) working? …Just one place!
Women in traditional Muslim dress take part in prayers outside the federal courthouse before a jury found 35-year-old Amina Farah Ali and 64-year-old Hawo Mohamed Hassan guilty on all counts Thursday, Oct. 20, 2011, in Minneapolis of conspiring to funnel money to a terrorist group in Somalia. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/24/islamist-terror-groups-target-minnesota-somali-ref/
When Mr. Hudson obviously blew his stack on air, relating to my question, and then wandered around per his response in a manner, which I would only describe as angry and unintelligible, I then suggested that perhaps taking a “Straw Poll” amongst the many victims and their families here in Minnesota, who have been directly affected by this insane combination of public policy, he lost it again, and suggested that no straw poll was necessary, or some such reaction by someone in denial.
I also informed Walter that I have lived overseas, and I have traveled overseas extensively, AND I HAVE VISITED THE “NO GO ZONE’ IN PARIS. I told him that he does not want to see that here. But, indicated to hime that the seeds for that here in Minnesota have already been sown. (See Stories: uniformed “Sharia [ LAW ] Police” patrols being tolerated by the MPD in the Cedar-Riverside area OF Minneapolis, now known as “little Mogadishu”)
I did have the opportunity, while he was continuing to talk over me at every turn to make the following statement, leading to a question: “I do not see a bunch of wild eyed Catholic, Lutherans, Presbyterians, or Methodists, as an organized effort per their cultural group thinking process, running around, and committing such horrible, barbaric, violent (Anti-American) atrocities, directed at Muslims, or any other groups of people”, based upon some religious differences as the driver for all this mayhem.
I also stated as a fact, that this entire experiment in “social justice”, and the seeds of this being sown all over Minnesota, per this “Welcoming Communities” nonsense, is, for economic reasons, “Public Health reasons”, and “Public Safety reasons”, is UNSUSTAINABLE and DANGEROUS.
He continued to present, what I can only describe as disjointed philosophical drool, relating to this very serious and very real life situation we are facing here in Minnesota, and sounding like the “can’t we all just get along” mantra of the left crowd, and doing everything possible to run from the discussion points being made by me throughout our brief discussion. He was finally successful by cutting me off completely, and hanging up on the call. ..Bad form Mr. Hudson..
If I had been given the opportunity to do so, I would have asked him the following questions:
* Is all the collateral damage, which has truly occurred here in Minnesota, and with greater frequency with each passing day now, acceptable losses to you Mr. Hudson?
* Is there no question in your mind relating to the cause and effect analysis per your own thinking about all this?
* Does the other side (Muslim “community”) bare any responsibility whatsoever, for the behavior of far too many of their brothers and sisters of their “book”, whether covertly or overtly involved?
* Do these people deserve (per demand and intimidation) “TO BE TREATED AS A SPECIAL CLASS OF MINNESOTANS”??, while other Minnesotans have to follow the rules of any civilized nation, and submit to US CONSTITUTIONAL LAW – AND PUBLICLY DISAVOW ANY ALLEGIANCE TO “SHARIA LAW”?
* Should this “community” – including CAIR Minnesota and their director Jaylani Hussein, be expected – in fact required, TO PUBLICLY CONDEMN HAMAS, THE MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, AL-QADEA, BOKO-HARAM, and label these organizations PROPERLY as terrorist organizations, and disavow their connection and allegiance to such groups.
* Should they as (Americans?) be required to pledge allegiance to our American flag (as all other immigrants to the United States have done over time), and pledge to support, and defend OUR US Constitution, etc. etc.?
* When accepting any position in “public office” anywhere in the US, should they be swearing in per their “book”?
* Should their Imams be afforded to “special” privilege” of being able to host POLITICALLY ORIENTED TRAINING PROGRAMS IN THEIR MOSQUES, when other religions would be risking their “Tax Exempt Status” by doing the same.
* Should only “special people” be allowed to reach “sharia law” IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS here in Minnesota, and have PRAYER ROOMS, PRAYER BREAKS, AND PRAYER RUGS in OUR Minnesota PUBLIC SCHOOLS SYSTEMS, when, per a long standing US Supreme decision: the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in the case of Lemon v. Kurtzman. In the 1971 case, the court ruled that a three-pronged test has to be passed for religious involvement in public schools. Is there secular purpose for the activity? Does the activity actively promote religion or inhibit religion? Is the “entanglement” between church and state “excessive?”. Because there are no other religious groups afforded ALL OF THE ABOVE, in terms accommodations, there is a problem here..
* Should there not be far better screening for serious, and sometimes, deadly “communicable diseases” being imported into Minnesota per the “Refugee Resettlement Program, and certainly the illegal “Sanctuary City(s)” public policy in full bloom in Minnesota. Additionally, shouldn’t the various Departments of Health in Minnesota be required to STOP HIDING CASES OF ACTIVE TUBERCULOSIS, and other lethal and debilitating IMPORTED diseases, and MAKE MANDATORY ALL PROPER MEDICAL PROCEDURES – INCLUDING INOCULATIONS AND ADDITIONAL PRECAUTIONS – TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC THEY ARE OBLIGED TO SERVE?
* Should not the participants in “Female Genital Mutilation” of female children, serial rape of female children (as young as 4 years or 5 years of age) as well as all other crimes committed in Minnesota, be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the LAW (US Constitutional LAW), and those convicted, be imprisoned, deported, and (relating to crimes involving children), have their children removed for their custody PERMANENTLY?
* Where are the home grown, or imported to Minnesota, terrorists being trained in Minnesota, or being conditioned to act and behave this antisocial and uncivilized manner, hate the infidel, hate Americans (while loving AND EMBRACING all the “free goodies” per our ridiculous welfare distributions systems), being schooled to believe that they can threaten and intimidate with impunity, rape children and women, kill or attempt to kill, commit arson, and a whole host of offences against OUR American society (with impunity), in spite of how short a time, or how long a time they have been in this country – AND AMPLE TIME ENOUGH TO ASSIMILATE? Who is teaching all this and where?
* There is certainly more, but this will do for now.
In any event, I called back after being cut off, relating to our brief encounter on the radio, and proposed the following to Mr. Hudson, per his call screener: I expressed a desire to be a guest on his program for two hours – up close and in studio – and an open, direct, and respectful discourse between one another relating to these interrelated and interconnected, and extremely critical issues concerning and impacting ALL MINNESOTANS today… I even suggested that he could invite his favorite Imam to sit in as well.
I left my name, some background information about me, my phone number, and asked for a return phone call. What do you think Walter. Shall we have a go?
I am still waiting…
What do you think? Will Hudson invite Carrillo on as a guest? I wouldn’t bet on it, but you never know! We will see what kind of a ‘conservative’ man Hudson is!
For more comments and guest columns, go here.
But, as expected they use the usual language meant to describe people who want to control immigration as “nativists,” “populists” and “Islamophobes.” Nevertheless, I found this article useful because it does confirm that what they call the Far Right or Radical Right is gaining power in Europe. Hoorah!
Entitled:
How the Far Right Has Reshaped the Refugee Debate in Europe
You can bet Frontline loved this scary and powerful photo of Polish “nationalists” demonstrating! Fires and flags are reminiscent to me of the 1683 Battle for the Gates of Vienna when the Polish army destroyed the Ottoman Turks and saved Europe for Christendom. (But, I doubt the Frontline people ever heard of it.)
Couldn’t one actually say that the refugee and migrant invasion is so great that sensible Germans, Poles, Hungarians, Swiss etc. are saying enough is enough because they do not want to be overrun and out bred.
The Open Borders Far Left, by permitting the refugee invasion, is shaping the debate in my view. The sensible people are reacting to the Left’s aggression.
Here is the opening segment of a longer interview. It is worth reading in its entirety.
Across Europe, parties on the far right are experiencing renewed vigor, fueled by economic uncertainty, cynicism toward the European Union, and anger over an ongoing crisis that has brought more than 1.5 million refugees and migrants to the West since 2015.
By last October, there were right-wing nationalist members of parliament in 24 European countries. In Germany, the EU’s largest country, the Alternative for Germany party became the first far-right group in more than six decades to win seats in parliament, with co-leader Alexander Gauland vowing after the election to fight “an invasion of foreigners.”
These parties have helped reshape the immigration debate in Europe. In countries like Hungary, razor-wire border fences have gone up to keep refugees and migrants out. Elsewhere on the continent, there’s been an upsurge of protests against refugees. In Poland, for example, an independence day celebration of around 60,000 people this past November was marred by thousands of far-right nationalists waving banners of “White Europe,” and chanting slogans of “No to Islam.”
Frontline’s big expert is an associate professor at the University of Georgia at Athens, GA. He is a Dutch Leftwinger indoctrinating your American kids. http://spia.uga.edu/faculty-member/cas-mudde/
According to Cas Mudde, a political scientist at the University of Georgia and a leading expert on far-right politics in Europe, Europe’s far right has used the refugee crisis to its advantage — channeling decades-old stereotypes about immigrants to rally support for their cause. These parties didn’t create anti-immigrant stereotypes, he says. Rather, they feed on them to influence the conversation.
Ahead of FRONTLINE’s Jan. 23 premiere of Exodus: The Journey Continues, we spoke with Mudde about the rise of Europe’s radical right, the refugee crisis, and why he considers the current political situation a “crisis of liberal democracy.”
This interview has been edited for clarity and length.
What are the defining tenets of Europe’s far-right movement?
The vast majority of the parties that are relevant are parties that are best called “radical right.” That means that they accept the basics of democracy — that the people elect their leaders — but they have major problems with some of the liberal protections of democracy. Most notably, minority rights. And so, they combine nativism, authoritarianism and populism. [Watch the increasing use of the word authoritarian because the Far Left is attaching that word to President Trump.—ed]
The assumption is that nativists are bad people and Frontline and Mudde want you to get that message loud and clear. LOL! they worked the word “nativism” into the story six times! I might suggest ‘preservationists’ is a more applicable term—-preserving culture and western civilization seems like a more accurate driving force for a growing number of Europeans and Americans. Frontline:
We’ve obviously seen our own resurgence of many of these same beliefs in the United States. How has Europe’s nativist, populist movement paralleled what’s happening here?
Well, in the narrow sense of the movement, there are not so many links. The radical right forces here, they are first and foremost American organizations with very few ties to Europe. Much of their nativism stands in a very long tradition of American nativism, going back at the very least to the mid-19th century. It is a bit different because there is a different enemy: Mexicans. [Huh?—ed] It also feeds into, of course, the specific history of racism and African Americans that Europe doesn’t have.
Look at his language dripping with bias—Islamophobic!
The strongest ties are actually within the Islamophobic community, because that argument is very similar. They have the same view because Islamophobia is not just about the Muslims inside of your country, it’s also against so-called “global Islam.” But I find it pretty stunning how prominent and salient Islamophobia is in a country like the United States, which has such a tiny Muslim population, which is not the case with the Muslim population in Europe.
Could that be because Americans are smart and are studying Islam and looking to Europe as the canary in a coal mine and they don’t want to be a dead canary country (as Mudde’s homeland is about to be, or is already!).
I just wish for once ‘journalists’ at Amos’s level would explain to her listeners some of the real facts about how the US Refugee Admissions Program operates, but maybe NPR listeners are only interested in horror stories about the President with headlines meant to alarm them in to action.
(More on that below)
But see how journalism professor Amos beginsher report (hat tip: Margaret) with Donald Trump declaring that Obama’s Australia deal was dumb. It was, and it is! Deborah Amos, advocate for the existing UN/US Refugee Admissions Program, opinion writer at NPR and Journalism visiting lecturer at Princeton University. https://journalism.princeton.edu/people/deborah-amos/
Last year began with an angry phone call about refugees, famously leaked later. The newly inaugurated Donald Trump exploded when Australia’s prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, asked him to honor a U.S. pledge to resettle some 1,200 refugees from Australia’s offshore detention centers.
“This is a stupid deal,” Trump fumed to an astonished Turnbull. “This shows me to be a dope.”
A day earlier, the president had signed an executive order temporarily halting the entire U.S. refugee resettlement program and slashed the number of expected arrivals President Obama had set.
Trump complained that by honoring the deal with Australia he was “going to get killed” politically and abruptly hung up the phone.
It was the harbinger of policies set in motion to unravel the U.S. refugee resettlement program, an issue that defined Trump’s election campaign and has shaped much of his first year in office.
What the heck!
She then goes on and never reports that the President is going along with the deal (doesn’t she read RRW?).
But, you see, admitting that the President caved-in to pressure and is now going to admit up to 1,200 migrants that Australia doesn’t want, who have been in Australian-controlled detention for as long as four years, doesn’t fit the opinion piece she crafted and thus wouldn’t help stir up Leftwing anger.
She then quotes former Middle East ambassador Ryan Crocker (Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama), bemoaning the (financial!) losses the federal refugee contractors*** will experience going forward:
“This is strategic, that’s why it’s different from previous anti-immigrant mindsets. It is a conscious effort to deconstruct the system,” Crocker says. He points to dramatic budget cuts for the nine private, voluntary agencies that for decades have contracted with the State Department to resettle and integrate the refugee population in communities across the U.S.
“The damage has already been done. These agencies run on the slimmest of margins. The layoffs are already doing structural damage. It’s going to take a long time to rebuild,” he says.
At this point, a real journalist would explain just a bit about the “voluntary agencies” (Ha! Ha!) which are almost completely funded by the US taxpayer, and, as such, are quasi-government organizations.
It would only take a paragraph or two to explain their financial structure based on federal payments on a refugee per head basis (hey! maybe even throw in a few numbers about CEO salaries). She might explain how they operate in secrecy in hopes that the locals won’t catch on to plans for their communities (Rutland, VT for example!).
She might say they are community organizers holding anti-Trump rallies like the recent one in Washington with CAIR, or that they hired the Podesta Group (for $100,000) to lobby for them.
She could point out that they could have been raising private charitable dollars to tide them over (and help refugees!) through slow refugee admission times. Or, maybe she could report on refugees left in the lurch by the contractors, some wishing to return to camps in Africa. You get my drift!
Then she quotes me wanting to be sure her listeners know what an extremist I am (well ok!). But, in many ways I’m more of an investigative journalist than she is!
“Donald Trump missed a fabulous opportunity to suspend the entire refugee admissions program,” activist Ann Corcoran complained to Breitbart News. Corcoran runs the Refugee Resettlement Watch website that regularly claims the resettlement program is corrupt and a health and security risk for communities that accept the newcomers. [Have I ever used the word corrupt?—ed]
Laughing my head off! This is my complete statement quoted at Breitbart:
“Donald Trump missed a fabulous opportunity to suspend the entire refugee admissions program, at least on a temporary basis, until we get back on our feet in Texas, Florida, and Puerto Rico,” Ann Corcoran, who runs the Refugee Resettlement Watch website, tells Breitbart News.
And, Amos is training young journalists at Princeton!
Yes, the President has great power under the Refugee Act of 1980 and he could have suspended it outright. His team obviously decided to “smother” it by cutting the numbers and consequently cutting the funding (your tax dollars) that feed the refugee contractors***. Immigration lawyer Becca Heller in Glamour magazine: “The fight against Trump….” https://www.glamour.com/story/becca-heller-irap-vs-trump-supreme-court
Here she gives Becca Hellerwith the International Refugee Assistance Project in New York a lot of column inches to say what we said yesterdaythat Congress will need to step in to make permanent changes to the law.
“We are in a pitched battle for the continued existence of the U.S. refugee resettlement program,” says Heller. “The numbers are going to be low for the next few years and it’s our job to keep them as high as we can.”
[….]
Heller says there are limits to the president’s powers to end the refugee resettlement program outright. Congress established the program’s framework and would need to vote to eliminate it.
“I think [the refugee program is] under attack but I don’t think it’s over. For one thing, it’s the law,” says Heller, pointing to the 1980 Refugee Act that sets out the provisions for the admission of refugees “of special humanitarian concern,” and the 1965 immigration law that emphasizes family reunification [aka chain migration—ed].
“The president may be able to temporarily prevent refugees from coming in,” Heller says. “It’s not going to successfully dismantle the program without Congress.”
Frelick says there is nothing in the law (Refugee Act of 1980) that says the US resettle a single refugee
Ms. Amos earlier in her piece, designed to paint the President in the worst light, while the refugee industry is pure as the driven snow, quoted a spokesperson for Human Rights First. But, she could have just as well quoted Bill Frelick of Human Rights Watch who said this in November 2016 and I reported here. Take that Ms. Heller!
See what refugee advocate and longtime expert Bill Frelick (Human Rights Watch) said in November after Trump was elected and the refugee industry went in to shell-shock:
“In the U.S., there’s not a quota that has to be filled. The U.S. has a budgeted amount of money to do refugee resettlement, but there’s no requirement that the U.S. resettle a single refugee, and there’s no legal obligation to do it.”
I suspect he wasn’t too popular with his peers/media after that statement. I rarely see him quoted now.
More promotion of the existing/flawed refugee program and criticism of the President from Ms. Amos here.
***These are the “voluntary agencies” responsible for all refugee resettlement in the US. I rarely use the phrase voluntary agencies (VOLAGs) because it makes me laugh. When one thinks of voluntary agencies, one thinks of non-governmental organizations working hard to raise private money and using volunteer workers to carry out their humanitarian good works, not agencies funded with MILLIONS of taxpayer dollars(involuntarily taken from you) and CEOs making $200,000, $300,000 and $600,000 annual salaries!
This is the scary thing when you know a good bit about a subject and you see some Leftist media reporter, with a big following (surely you have seen her on Fox), writing about something she knows little about.
In this case it is Betsy Woodruff on the Rohingya.
Woodruff (left) and her friend Michelle Fields being oh-so-cool pretending to be serious Washington DC journalists! P.S. the devout Rohingya would not like those dresses. https://everipedia.org/wiki/betsy-woodruff/
Here (below) is the title of her piece where she suggests that anyone who doesn’t believe that the Rohingya are pure as the driven snow are themselves inciting violence.
She includes Ann Coulter, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and yours truly as instigators of violence (murder and rape by Buddhists) against the poor, much-maligned Rohingya Muslims of Burma (actually they are most likely Bangladeshis) simply because we haven’t bought the ethnic cleansing story hook, line and sinker.
The American Far Right Asks: What Rohingya Ethnic Cleansing?
Before you read Woodruff’s yellow journalism, I want to say a few things. I have followed the build-up of the controversy in Burma for ten years and have written 212 previous reportson Rohingya people.
I’ve watched the international Left build a classic propaganda campaign to promote the image of the Rohingya as the poster-children for ethnic cleansing—poor suffering souls who only want to be left alone to build their Muslim community in the midst of a violent (to hear them tell it) bunch of Buddhists.
The fact that famous Burmese human rights activist Aung San Suu Kyi has not jumped to the defense of the Rohingya is telling. Dear Betsy, is she a Far Right activist too?
And, finally, yes there have been excesses from the Buddhists. It would be inexcusable for me (although I’m just a blogger) not to say that, but surely a ‘journalist’ of Woodruff’s stature might actually mention the rape and killing carried out by the Rohingya against Buddhists.
Here are Woodruff’s opening comments:
Some of the most influential figures in the far right have suggested that the Rohingya had Burma’s ethnic-cleansing campaign coming.
The Burmese government is engaged in a campaign of ethnic cleansing that has displaced more than 600,000 Rohingya civilians from their homes. Burmese military forces have burned dozens of Rohingya villages, raped women and girls, and murdered scores of people, according to an October report from Amnesty International. The government’s brutality against the predominantly Muslim ethnic minority has drawn condemnation from the United Nations, the international human rights community, and the U.S. State Department.
But in far-right media, it’s a different story. Some of the most influential figures of the far right have helped amplify voices that incite violence, and have even suggested that the Rohingya had it coming.
Continue readingas she gasps over remarks by Coulter, Geller, Spencer and unnamed writers at Breitbart including this one (she provides no link) who apparently said this:
(Let me ask you faithful readers if this sounds outrageous to you.)
“Perhaps the Buddhists are trying to maintain their own history and culture in the face of calls for destruction,” it concluded.
What an unthinkable concept that is according to Woodruff (gasping again)!
Yup! Monks being politically incorrect!
She does give a link for a recent story at World Net Daily by Leo Hohmann where I am quoted:
And WorldNetDaily, a site best known for promoting birther conspiracy theories***, recently ran a piece indicating Burma’s government was handling the Rohingya crisis appropriately.
“The Buddhists get it,” anti-refugee activist Ann Corcoran told the site. “They are being very politically incorrect.”
(Gasp!)
I urge anyone considering themselves journalists to visit my Rohingya Reportscategory with over 200 previous posts. You should learn that the Rohingya began the latest round of violence in 2012. First came the rape and murder of a Buddhist girl by Rohingya and retaliation by Buddhists. Then the Rohingya burned some Buddhist villages in Rakhine state….and back and forth it went.
*** Have some fun, go back to Woodruff’s pieceand see how many words she uses that are yellow journalism techniques— exaggerations of news events, scandal-mongering or sensationalism. Like this: “conspiratorial right-wing Robert Spencer.”
Post is filed in my ‘Laugh of the day’ category, here.
