Hoodwinked: How Hamas influenced int'l media to not cover emaciated hostages - opinion

 The Jerusalem Post  

"It is no wonder that young people, who have been statistically proven to be more impressionable than their parents, could think that Israel perpetrated a genocide in Gaza and not believe that more Israelis were murdered on Oct. 7, 2023, than any one day since the Holocaust."

A photo of my frail grandmother helping her even more gaunt sister choose a dress after the liberation of the Bergen-Belsen death camp graces the wall at the Yad Vashem World Holocaust Remembrance Center.

"My grandmother recovered physically but was scarred emotionally. Nevertheless, she still managed to move to Israel, run a business, raise a family, and live long enough to see her grandchildren thrive in the Jewish state.

"Her sister, however, was not so fortunate, and that photo, which was apparently taken two days before she died of typhus in the camp, is all that is left of her. The only consolation is that the image of the sick and sicker women that paints the picture of the challenges after the camp’s liberation remains seared in the minds of anyone who visits the museum.

"Therefore, I was genuinely startled by the top media outlets in the world that did not deem the frail images of the three Israeli hostages released on Saturday worthy of an immediate story. For even the most jaded journalists, how could the emergence from Gaza of the emaciated Eli Sharabi, Or Levy, and Ohad Ben Ami not move you?

"Israeli media and influencers immediately made the connection between Holocaust survivors and the hostages released after 491 days in Hamas captivity. The president of the United States got it, too." . . .

. . ."Under the direction of an Al Jazeera producer in Doha, Hamas has been staging hostage releases to get across its messages on the stages erected for its cynical shows, with full cooperation of the international media.

"Hamas wisely released the hostages who were in the best condition first when the world was watching. Now that the releases have become routine, and the top media are no longer paying attention, they are unchaining the skeletal men from the terror dungeons where they have been tortured." . . .

What’s really causing California’s wildfires?

 Sharyl Attkisson 

 "Donald Trump: I was with the head of Austria. He said, “you know it’s a shame, I see all those forest fires in California,” and all they have to do is clean their forest, meaning, rake it up, get rid of the leaves, leaves that are sitting there for five years."

"As I’ve flipped around on TV and the Internet to look at the California wildfire coverage, I rarely hear the national reporters and analysts addressing what is really one of the most important and obvious elements: What’s causing the fires?

"The announcers use language such as, “Six more fires broke out…” and “Two more fires popped up,” as if somehow fires are mysteriously spontaneously combusting out of nowhere.

"Well, we all know that doesn’t happen.

"Why isn’t there more reporting emphasis on getting at the causes of these fires? Even if we don’t know suspected causes for all of them, there are certainly investigations underway, and suspicions for some of them. 

"But too often it’s as if the news reporters don’t seem very curious. They don’t point out what’s being done to figure out the causes, or what the suspected causes are.

"A look at recent history shows that arson and faulty power lines are most frequently to blame for California’s fires. Lightning strikes from storms are also a factor, but in recent weeks there have been no reports of storms in the afflicted area.

"On my Sunday television program “Full Measure,” we’ve been reporting on the human factors behind a lot of the devastation in California’s past wildfires, and in the aftermath of the current disasters." . . .

The Left’s War on Trump 2.0: A Descent into Madness

 American Free News Network   

The Democrats’ fear is off the charts, and as a result, Musk now has a massive target on his back. In their eyes, he must be destroyed. 

Ayanna Presley

The Democrats’ resistance to President Donald Trump’s return has reached the point of madness. Already reeling from the deluge of executive orders reversing the far-Left policies of the Biden administration, they lost all control when the United States Agency for International Development was exposed as little more than a global slush fund for progressive causes by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency.

"Well aware that the reports of corruption and waste are accurate, and that Musk’s brigade of 20-something tech wizards will be systematically examining the other 99% of the federal budget, hysteria has replaced rational thinking and prevented a coherent response. Democrats are lashing out haphazardly and the party’s credibility, already diminished by the November election, is disintegrating before our eyes.

"Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus inadvertently spoke the truth in a recent op-ed. Titled Trump 2.0: The most damaging first two weeks in presidential history, its subheadline read, “Trump’s second term is all about curtailing government’s power and reach.”

"To the average citizen, the title and subheadline of the piece may seem contradictory. Most Americans consider the curtailment of government power and reach a positive development. Not so for the Democrats. Because U.S. federal agencies are largely led and staffed by liberals, an expanding government translates to an extension of Democratic power. Conversely, a leaner, more streamlined government threatens their grip on power, and as always, Democrats will do whatever is necessary to maintain it.

"Democratic lawmakers beclowned themselves last week after DOGE revealed the extent of the corruption and waste inside USAID. In a collective frenzy, a large group of House Democrats and several senate leaders converged outside of the Treasury Department building to let their voices be heard.

"New Jersey Rep. LaMonica McIver bellowed into the microphone, “We will not take this! We will fight back! And godd*** it, shut down the Senate! We are at war!” Was she calling for an insurrection?

"Massachusetts Rep. Ayanna Pressley directed her ire toward her Republican colleagues. With California Rep. Maxine Waters grinning at her side, she shouted, “Pay attention. We’re here today in the hopes that you will see the light. But if you do not see the light, we will bring the fire. Resist!' ” . . .

If It Please the Court, Who the Hell Asked You?

 Ann Coulter 

If the president’s authority to make personnel decisions in the executive branch is subject to judicial veto, can a district court judge veto bills? Order Congress to adjourn or to pass a law? Make treaties? Perhaps we could have all 677 district court judges give their own State of the Union addresses next January!

"Democrats, those stalwart champions of democracy who tried to keep Donald Trump off the ballot, have an endlessly malleable understanding of whose view prevails whenever disputes arise between any combination of Congress, the courts, the president and the states. It’s almost as if they decide based not on any fixed principle, but on whose side they take.

"When Joe Biden was president, he openly defied Supreme Court rulings — and bragged about doing so. Despite the court repeatedly telling him he had no authority to forgive student loans, he kept doing it. “The Supreme Court blocked it,” he said, “but that didn’t stop me.” No complaints from the left.

"When Barack Obama was president, federal control of immigration was absolute! Arizona was said to be prohibited from following federal law because the president had decided not to follow the law. Suddenly, every Democrat was talking about the supremacy clause and claiming Arizona had been overtaken by Nazis.

"Eventually, the Supreme Court upheld Arizona’s so-called “Papers Please” law, and the hysterics, confident that no one would remember their smug assurances that the law was unconstitutional, went right back to uttering their weighty pronouncements.

"But when Trump was abiding by federal law in issuing what liberals called “the Muslim ban” (that, oddly enough, never mentioned Muslims), district courts and Trump’s own acting attorney general decided that their interpretation of a president’s duties should prevail over his.

"They were heroes! At least until the Supreme Court upheld Trump’s non-Muslim-mentioning Muslim ban. It seems that — contra every editorial page in America — federal law expressly grants the president authority to exclude aliens if, in his opinion, their presence “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

"Whereupon everyone who’d screamed that we were living through a “constitutional crisis” (defined as “anything Democrats dislike”), “authoritarianism,” “tyranny” and “Trump’s Immigration Ban Is Illegal” (a New York Times headline) pretended not to notice the decision and never spoke of it again." . . .

Whoa: MSNBC's Response to RFK's Swearing-In Explains Exactly Why People No Longer Trust Media

RedState 

 If they think they can play this kind of game for the next four years, then they should prepare to lose even more in the ratings. They're going to talk over reality and hope to sway people? It's not going to work.

NEW: MSNBC mutes Donald Trump’s mic to bring on a physician to sh*t on RFK Jr. instead.
“Donald Trump is now speaking at the lectern before RFK Jr. will be sworn in… So let’s listen to this.”
“We’re not going to listen to this. I’m so sorry. We’re going to watch this. For now,… pic.twitter.com/C0DvkqK8Dc

— The Vigilant Fox 🦊 (@VigilantFox) February 13, 2025

"As we reported, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was confirmed by the Senate on Thursday, 52-48, to be the new Secretary of Health and Human Services, despite the failed efforts of Democrats to derail him. 

'Kennedy was then sworn in, in the Oval Office by Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, and both he and President Donald Trump delivered remarks. Given the drama around Kennedy, particularly from the Democrats, you would think that this would be big news to show — one way or another, that it was pretty historic. Kennedy delivered some very powerful and touching remarks in which he praised Trump. I'll tease that we have a good story coming on that shortly. 

'But if you were hoping to listen to it, and you were watching MSNBC as the swearing-in happened, you would have been out of luck. Here's host Katy Tur saying they're going to be listening to the event and what Trump has to say, and then cut to an "expert" for commentary about the event. But then, suddenly, she shifts and essentially says, "Oops, we're not going to be listening. Sorry, folks! We're just going to 'watch'" — without letting the people hear the ceremony or any of the important things they might have to say." . . . 

Democrats Find a Cause to Rally Around: Reparations

 American Greatness  

"Although the the idea of forcing reparations on people for a nation’s past injustices is deeply unpopular with the American people, Democrats are not giving up." 

Those stoning Reginald Denny should have to be rewarded for his white supremacy

"While fiercely resisting the Trump administration’s work to eliminate government waste, fraud and abuse, Democrats have found their own cause to rally around.

"A group of congressional Democrats led by Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) have reintroduced legislation that seeks to use taxpayer dollars to pay reparations to black Americans who are descendants of slaves, Fox News reported.

" 'We are in a moment of anti-Blackness on steroids and we refuse to be silent,” said Pressley, a member of the far-left “Squad,”  during a news conference Wednesday. “We will not back down in our pursuit of racial justice.”

"Booker’s office released a statement on the reparations bill, which has 17 Senate Democrat cosponsors, last month.

" 'We as a nation have not yet truly acknowledged and grappled with the ways slavery, racism, and white supremacy continue to disadvantage African Americans,” Booker said in a statement. “Commissioning a study to better understand where our country has fallen short will help lawmakers better address the racial disparities and inequalities that persist today as a result of generational injustices.”

"H.R.40, or the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African Americans Act, aims to “create a commission to study the impact of slavery and develop ways to deliver reparations to African Americans who are descendants of slaves.”

"Democrat Rep. Summer Lee (D-Penn.) said during the presser Wednesday that every presidential administration has “an obligation” to provide reparations  to black people “to eliminate the racial wealth gap.” Lee argued that “white supremacy is rampant in this country. Just look at the current administration and our own legislative body.” . . .

"April 2023 Squeal Award to President Biden."

 

https://www.terrellaftermath.com/

All aboard! Taxpayers are being taken for a ride on the Biden Boondoggle Express.   "While the president likes to boast that his $1 trillion “infrastructure” bill is building a better America, the truth is Bidenomics and bureaucratic bungling are busting budgets and postponing completion of projects across the country.

"Remember the California High-Speed Train I called out before? Sold to taxpayers at a price of $33 billion and a completion date of 2020, this train still hasn’t left the station. Construction is costing about $1.8 million a day and it won’t be completed for another decade. The total price has skyrocketed to $128 billion— that’s nearly $100 billion more than the original price tag!" . . .

. . ."The Obama/Biden administration committed $3.5 billion for this gravy train as a “shovel ready” project more than a decade ago. President Trump stopped payment, saving nearly $1 billion. Now, the Biden administration has restored that money and even added another $50 million more, praising the project as an example of President Biden’s “build back better” approach. Then-Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi even celebrated how passage of the Biden bill would help to bring the high-cost, high-speed train into San Francisco." . . .

Is Taylor Swift the next ‘Brandon’?

 American Thinker  

"This looks like yet another example of sports networks and sites gaslighting the viewers and readers to avoid stating that which must not be said." As below:

 

MSNBC's Ali Velshi says situation not 'generally speaking
 unruly' while standing outside burning building

"Who can forget when an NBC reporter, interviewing unexpected NASCAR winner Brandon Brown after the race, tried to gaslight viewers hearing the loud chorus of “F--- Joe Biden” chants from the crowd in the stands by saying, “As you can hear the chants from the crowd, ‘Let’s Go Brandon.’”  This spawned LGB memorabilia and an unforgettable rap.

"During Super Bowl Sunday night on Fox, when famous singer Taylor Swift, girlfriend of Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce and seated at the game, was shown on the big screen, the crowd erupted into a loud chorus of boos.  The angle from the announcers of the game (Kevin Burkhardt and Tom Brady) was that there were more Eagles fans in the stadium than Chiefs fans.  CBS Sports had the same take.  But on conservative media such as Instapundit, the loud booing was attributed to something else: Swift’s prominent endorsement of Kamala Harris in the presidential election.  (Yes, Swift was pressured by the left to do it, but in the words of Glenn Reynolds of the Instapundit, “She chose...poorly.”)  So who is right?

"First of all, the same crowd enthusiastically cheered for President Trump.  Furthermore, as far as I can recall, at last year’s Super Bowl, also with the Chiefs playing, Swift wasn’t audibly booed even by a subset of the crowd.  I don’t recall any other celebrity rooting for either team in any Super Bowl being so loudly booed.  Swift is not the first celebrity attending a Super Bowl to be the girlfriend of a player, either.  So if sports analysts are going to speculate on the cause of the booing and state it as fact, a better guess would be her Kamala endorsement." ...

Legacy media giant reportedly shifting resources from left-wing paper to promote…a conservative press

  Olivia Murray 

. . ." but one cannot make a logical and persuasive case to support her, because the facts don’t support it. Democrat voters almost universally despised Harris until legacy media outlets told them it was time to pretend she was competent and cunning."

"It looks like the billionaire business mogul who owns the Los Angeles Times may have been red-pilled.

"According to a report from the New York Post, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, who made his wealth in biotech, is in the process of transforming his media empire by shifting resources away from the LA Times, which he bought in 2018 for half-a-billion dollars, and pouring them into a new venture…a conservative press.

"The same article reveals that Soon-Shiong was the man behind the decision to withhold an endorsement for Kamala Harris just as the editorial board was prepared to publish it shortly before the November 5th election, which set off a wave of cancelled subscriptions from progressive readers and preceded a handful of resignations in the office.

"Now here’s where it gets really interesting (and vindicating), because if I had to guess, I’d say this was probably the “straw-that-broke-the-camel’s-back” moment for Soon-Shiong; from an LA Times piece:" . . . 

. . ."It’s also especially offensive since even the “news” section of LA Times has seemed almost entirely opinion-based, again, without the facts to even present the opinions as compelling and reasonable positions.

"As Dr. Lifson observed, it’s almost like there’s an emerging “red-pill” trend among self-made billionaires, and that it’s mostly the inheritors who go and stay woke—Soon-Shiong’s daughter is a radical, progressive activist." . . .