North Korea: officials executed for watching soap operas

October 29, 2014
"Dear Leader, Jr."

“Secretly records ‘Days of Our Lives'”

Well, they were South Korean soaps, and thus vehicles for dangerous wrong-thought. So the viewers had to be killed. Or something:

At least 10 North Korean officials have reportedly been put to death recently for the crime of watching South Korean soap operas.

The latest public executions reportedly bring to at least 50 the number of people put to death by the hard-line regime for taking in the unauthorized day-time dramas from south of the DMZ, The Independent reports, quoting South Korean sources familiar with a National Intelligence Service (NIS) briefing.

Go to the original article in The Independent and you’ll see that smuggling in South Korean soaps and action shows is big business. It apparently pays well enough that smugglers are willing to risk their lives to get it into the North, while political activists will launch balloons carrying the “subversive” programming over the DMZ.

There’s a reason North Korean authorities would liquidate anyone caught watching these: they really are subversive of Pyongyang’s preferred, neo-Stalinist order. And they don’t have to be overtly political to be dangerous; it’s not the family drama or the wild car chase that poses the threat — it’s what North Koreans see in the background, glimpses of life in the South. Nice homes and furniture. The latest electronics. The ability to say what one thinks without being shot for it. Plenty of food. And, while seeing all that, they might begin to think “Why can’t we have those things?” As the late Andrew Breitbart often said, “culture is upstream of politics.”

That is what scares the tar out of Kim Jong Un and his handlers, and that’s why they’re willing to shoot people who are willing to defy them by watching those forbidden programs. They’re desperate to stop a cultural virus from spreading, but it’s already too late. More and more people are going to see what life is like without a Dear Leader Man-Child Who Thinks He Is A God ruling them and, one day, they’re going to do something about it.  At that point the regime will collapse like a house of cards, just like Poland, East Germany, and even the USSR. It may not be for many years, but it will happen, and these TV programs will have played a role.

via

PS: I’d hate to think what they’d do to someone caught watching reality TV! smiley worried


Did the government hack Sharyl Attkisson’s computers and set her up for a frame job?

October 27, 2014

sharyl attkisson

That’s the explosive accusation in the former CBS investigative reporter’s forthcoming memoir, previewed in the New York Post:

Attkisson says the source, who’s “connected to government three-letter agencies,” told her the computer was hacked into by “a sophisticated entity that used commercial, nonattributable spyware that’s proprietary to a government agency: either the CIA, FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency or the National Security Agency.”

The breach was accomplished through an “otherwise innocuous e-mail” that Attkisson says she got in February 2012, then twice “redone” and “refreshed” through a satellite hookup and a Wi-Fi connection at a Ritz-Carlton hotel.

The spyware included programs that Attkisson says monitored her every keystroke and gave the snoops access to all her e-mails and the passwords to her financial accounts.

“The intruders discovered my Skype account handle, stole the password, activated the audio, and made heavy use of it, presumably as a listening tool,” she wrote in “Stonewalled: My Fight for Truth Against the Forces of Obstruction, Intimidation, and Harassment in Obama’s Washington.”

And if that’s not bad enough:

But the most shocking finding, she says, was the discovery of three classified documents that Number One told her were “buried deep in your operating system. In a place that, unless you’re a some kind of computer whiz specialist, you wouldn’t even know exists.”

The logical conclusion is that those documents were planted to serve as a reason to prosecute Attkisson, should she ever prove too troublesome. And she has been a thorn in the paw of the administration for several years, digging deeply and doggedly both into the Benghazi and Fast and Furious scandals. Fortunately (from the government’s point of view), CBS was willing to run interference, until it got to the point that Attkisson felt she had no choice but to resign.

Like I said, these are explosive allegations if true, and Attkisson is putting her reputation on the line by making them. (One should note that her source remains unidentified.) At the very least, this calls for a congressional investigation into the administration’s possible persecution of some in the media. (Let’s not forget how they went after FOX News’ James Rosen and the AP.) Sadly, one cannot trust the current Justice Department to investigate the matter fairly.

“Nixonian” doesn’t begin to describe the White House under Obama.

RELATED: Power Line calls this potentially one of the biggest scandals in US history and suggests Ms. Attkisson hire a top lawyer.


(Video) Who are the real racists: liberals or conservatives?

October 27, 2014

Liberal tolerance racist

If you’re a conservative, or just someone who thinks everyone should be treated equally, you’ve probably been called a racist at one point or another. And if, like most people, you’re a decent person, you’ve probably been taken aback and left wondering if maybe, subconsciously, you did hold beliefs and attitudes that were racist.

Stop wondering. You’re not. In fact, as Derryck Green of Project 21 explains in this Prager University video, it’s the American Left that harbors the racist attitudes, rooted in the assumption that Blacks just can’t compete, the infamous “soft bigotry of low expectations:”

So, relax. You’re not racist for believing we can all be held to the same standards. Far from it.

via Legal Insurrection

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


I guess, per @DonnaBrazile, the Washington Post must be “big ass liars”

October 24, 2014
Donna Brazile

Donna Brazile

After all, it was Al Gore’s former campaign manager who said there is no real “concrete evidence” of voter fraud and that it was all a “big ass lie.”

Tell that to the non-citizens who fraudulently vote and might decide a close election:

How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010.

Estimated Voter Turnout by Non-Citizens
2008 2010
Self reported and/or verified 38 (11.3%) 13 (3.5%)
Self reported and verified 5 (1.5%) N.A.
Adjusted estimate 21 (6.4%) 8 (2.2%)

Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.

Emphases added. Note that a requirement to show ID didn’t often help in these cases:

We also find that one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted.

Clearly election workers need better training to spot IDs issued to immigrants, or else there are a heck of a lot of forged IDs out there. And non-citizens voting illegally should be subject to immediate deportation.

Meanwhile, I wonder how Donna Brazile feels at being shown to be a big as.. er… fat idiot? Again.


Is President Obama a Republican mole?

October 21, 2014

barack obama capitol

Sometimes I think that’s the only explanation. Consider what’s happened: More than half the nation wants to repeal and replace his signature legislation, Obamacare; if you add in those who want to just repeal it, you’re pushing 60%. In 2010 the nation punished the Democrats with huge federal and state losses. The 2009 “stimulus” bill was a big, fat failure that only rewarded cronies and drove up the national debt. His foreign policy is a shambles in a way we haven’t seen since the lowest days of Jimmy Carter’s maladministration. His administration has utterly bungled the Ebola crisis. His job approval rating has been mired in the low 40% for months. All this and more have given incumbent Democratic senators and candidates seeking to unseat Republicans good reason to run screaming from Obama and his policies to try save their party’s grip on the federal Senate. Some will do anything to avoid saying they voted for him.

But, for some reason, Obama won’t let them run away, regardless of his protestations otherwise. First he said that his policies are definitely on the ballot, in effect declaring this a referendum election on him. Democrat candidates in difficult races across the country did a collective face-palm.

But then in an interview with MSNBC’s Al Sharpton, discussing incumbents running for reelection in states that voted against him in 2012, which are most of those holding elections in this cycle,  Obama doubled down:

Here’s a partial transcript:

“The bottom line is tough, these are all folks who vote with me, they have supported my agenda in Congress…” and “These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me,…”

Those sounds you hear are Mark Pryor, Allison Lundergan Grimes, Kay Hagan, Mary Landrieu, Mark Udall, Bruce Braley, and other Democrat candidates all speed-dialing to look for lobbying jobs after the election. Because, with Obama’s “help,” that’s the only way they’re going to D.C.

Maybe it’s his ego overwhelming his common sense, but, whatever the reason, President Obama may be the Republicans’ best friend in this election.


Why do Democrats fight voter ID?

October 20, 2014
"I get to vote twice? Gee, thanks, pal!"

“No ID needed? Gee, thanks, pal!”

Writing at PJ Media, former DoJ election law attorney J. Christian Adams argues that it isn’t so much because they want to cheat (1), but that there are other, more subtle reasons. He describes three. Read the article for the first and the last, but I want to highlight the second:

2. Voter ID Opponents Have the Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations.

Leftist opponents of voter ID truly think minorities are less able to function in American life. I learned this when a Department of Justice Voting Section lawyer opposed to voter ID told me he thought blacks were more likely to forget their photo identification than whites were. Their lives “were more disorganized,” he said. This is a lawyer currently still working in the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department. This is a perfect example of the “soft bigotry of low expectations.”

And it isn’t just one crank lawyer at DOJ. The plaintiffs challenging voter ID and election integrity laws actually hired an expert to testify in federal court in voter ID cases that blacks were less capable of functioning efficiently in a daily routine and photo ID laws have a disparate impact on them. The expert called this idea the “calculus of voting.” For example, they have to take the bus more. Taking the bus, naturally, makes it harder to get photo ID.

The plaintiffs argue that voting “is largely a product of habit,” and blacks, well, their habits just don’t brook any interruptions to their habits, so they argue.

This is another perfect example of the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” Opponents of voter ID are genuinely afraid that forcing blacks to get photo ID will impose a burden on them they just can’t handle.

This is a subset of the Progressive belief that modern society is too complex for the average person to handle, and so we need (in the early 20th century formulation) boards of experts to run the economy and manage social relations for us. Hence the Democrats’ eagerness, which has infected many Republicans, to hand off legislative functions to administrative agencies run by supposedly expert bureaucrats.

What Adams describes, though, is essential to the victim-culture that pervades the Left. Blacks and other minorities have so suffered from both blatant and structural racism that they simply can’t overcome life’s obstacles on their own, so they have to be excused from what would otherwise be a reasonable requirement. Never mind that one has to show an ID to write a check or board a plane.

It’s also blatantly patronizing and offensive toward minorities.

RELATED: Mr. Adams has written a book exposing the blatant racialism at the Justice Department, including its battle against voter ID laws. Also, for the dirty history of the Democratic Party on race, be sure to read “Wrong on Race.”

Footnote:
(1) Here’s I’ll disagree with Mr. Adams a bit. John Fund has written an excellent book on (mostly) Democratic election fraud, and the conviction of ACORN in Nevada, the probably fraud in the 2004 Washington gubernatorial election, and the confirmed fraud in the 2004 presidential balloting in Milwaukee all show that at least some Democrats and their allies on the left have a strong interest in benefiting from fraud.


Climate Change: scratch a Green, find a Red

September 24, 2014
Watermelons

Watermelons

The anonymous photo-blogger Zombie does an invaluable service by visiting the People’s Climate March in Oakland to record for posterity the ideological core of the modern environmentalist movement: bare-naked statism in the form of totalitarian communism:

Communists along with a few environmental groups staged a “People’s Climate Rally” in Oakland, California on Sunday, September 21, in conjunction with the larger “People’s Climate March” in New York City on the same day.

Wait — did I say communists? Isn’t that a bit of an exaggeration?

Well…no.

At the New York event, many people noticed that gee, there sure are a lot of communists at this march. But in Oakland — always on the cutting edge — the entire “climate change” movement at last fully, irrevocably and overtly embraced communism as its stated goal. Any concerns about “optics” or operating in “stealth mode” were abandoned.

The “climate change” “crisis” is now nothing but the latest justification for “total revolution” and getting rid of capitalism forever.

Zombie Climate March Oakland

(Photo credit: Zombie)

Be sure to read the whole thing. Remember, it’s not about polar bears and rising seas, it’s about control.

RELATED: For more about the Socialist origins and nature of the global-warming scare, read Christopher Booker’s “The Real Global Warming Disaster” and James Delingpole’s “Watermelons.”


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 13,568 other followers