-Caveat Lector-
http://www.rense.com/general24/defn.htm
In Defense Of Cynthia McKinney
By Carol Schiffler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
4-23-2
Dealing with Ann Coulter's post-September 11 blathering was bad enough. But
we could forgive Ann - just the teensiest bit - because she had just lost her
best friend, Barbara Olson, and besides, even on a good day, Ann Coulter is
clearly insane.
But now it appears that the Bush administration's Propaganda Dominatrix has
some competition in Kathleen Parker, a woman who has all the feral charm of a
wolverine in heat and, apparently, all the reasoning ability of a clam. I am
referring, of course, to her recent attacks on one of the few responsible
adults in Congress, Cynthia McKinney.
Fortunately for us, Ms. Parker's arguments are completely devoid of
substance, thereby offering us ample opportunity to just shoot the living
hell out of them.
The first half of her latest column, 'McKinney's Minions March to a Different
Drummer Indeed,' is entirely devoted to hurling personal epithets and
therefore can be dismissed in its entirety.
The second half, however, contains her great 'Aha!' moment, her stunning
revelation, the payoff for grueling seconds of investigative journalism. For
it is here we discover that Cynthia McKinney - gasp! - received a campaign
contribution from Abdurahman Alamoudi, 'founder and former executive director
of the American Muslim Council,' and a staunch 'axis-of-evil' kind of guy if
there ever was one.
It is a good thing for Ms. Parker that her fans are not the sharpest knives
in the drawer. If they were, perhaps they might discover that this same group
of swarthy characters endorsed - gasp! - George W. Bush for president. Yes,
it is true. The Hamas-and-Hezbollah-for-lunch-bunch were some of Dubya's
biggest fans. At least they were before September 11. (As an interesting, and
sadly ironic, aside, the primary reason the American Muslim Council supported
Bush was because he "challenged the use of 'secret' evidence at the second
presidential debate.")
Ms. Parker, I am sure, would be quick to point out that George the Lesser
returned Alamoudi's campaign contribution, (and, yes, he received one), and
good for him because it would have looked really bad if he kept his after
Hillary returned hers, (first, by the way). But - BUT - you have to wonder
why, three days after September 11, the Global Village Idiot trotted out none
other than Abdurahman Alamoudi at the National Cathedral prayer service for
the victims of the attack. Surely, of the estimated six million American
Muslims, he could have found one single Islamic leader that would have been,
shall we say, in better taste.
And then there is the matter of long-time Bush supporter, Grover Norquist.
According to the October 4 issue of the Boston Phoenix, "Norquist's lobbying
firm, Janus-Merritt Strategies LLC, was officially registered as a lobbyist
for the Islamic Institute as well as for Abdurahman Alamoudi."
Public records show that Alamoudi has done more than $20,000 worth of
business with Norquist's firm. Which, by Parker's own twisted logic, makes
fellow conservative, Grover Norquist, about twenty times the terrorist-lover
that Ms. McKinney supposedly is. And I have yet to hear that John Ashcroft
has put Janus-Merritt Strategies LLC on the terrorist watch list.
Astute readers have already made the point that all Cynthia McKinney did was
call for a thorough investigation of September 11 - something the Bush
administration has been loathe to do. The fact is, that upon setting up a
committee for the explicit purpose of investigating the tragedy, the very
first thing Bush and company did was to clip the wings of the investigators.
Their directive, in the end, was not to find out what went wrong, but
instead, to merely make recommendations for preventing future incidents.
Now I ask you - what earthly sense does that make? In essence, Bush was
telling the committee to make suggestions on how to fix something when the
cause of that broken 'something' was not yet determined. This is sensational
public relations, but thank goodness George decided to become a politician
and not a brain surgeon. ("I don't know what's causing your headache, Mrs.
Dettweiler, but let's just operate on your prefrontal lobe and see if that
does the trick.")
George Bush, for all his posturing and Rambo-speak, has spent about as much
time impeding a thorough investigation as he has vacationing and napping -
which is to say, quite a bit - and rightfully, this has led many, many people
to wonder just what the heck he is up to. This is a logical question, not a
'delusional' one, and Ms. McKinney is to be commended for having the courage
to ask it.
As for Ms. Parker, gutlessly spewing the GOP party line, I would like to
point out that not liking the politics someone who is asking uncomfortable
questions does not invalidate the argument. Combining a facetious line of
questioning with sledge hammer innuendo, Kathy Dearest is trying to have it
both ways. First she suggests that the question, 'Who profits?' is
irrelevant. Then she attempts to assign it relevancy, but only as it pertains
to Ms. McKinney.
For argument's sake, let's allow that it's fair for Ms. Parker to question
Cynthia McKinney about that campaign contribution. Would she then perhaps
admit that George Bush has a bit of explaining to do, too? Not likely. She
has already consigned McKinney, the sorceress, and her evil 'minions' to the
bottom of the looney bin for even thinking such a thing. (Please note that
neither Parker, nor her GOP brethren, had any problem asking the 'Who
profits?' question when it came to Bill Clinton. In pundit-world, hypocrisy
trumps intellectual honesty every time.)
Ms. Parker did get one thing right, though. Those of us demanding honest
answers to direct questions have been dwelling in the basement for a long,
long time - but it has not been a voluntary confinement. We have been
imprisoned there by a mendacious and duplicitous government; a government
that seems to believe that all it needs to do to keep us happy is to throw
down a fresh load of cow manure from time to time.
Well, the cellar doors are rattling now, Ms. Parker, and when there are
enough of us who refuse to sit in the dark and contentedly munch our cow
chips like good boys and girls, there will be - how did Babs put it - Hell to
pay.
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
