Posted on 06/28/2008 10:36:43 AM PDT by kristinn
The Washington Post published an article today in the Style section about researcher Danielle Allen's efforts to track down who is behind allegations that presumed Democratic presidential nominee Sen. Barack Hussein Obama (Illinois) is a Muslim. Allen is an Obama supporter who works for the Institute for Advanced Study.
The article was written by Matthew Mosk. A curious choice for The Post considering Mosk's involvement in the nefarious MD4Bush scandal in which Mosk claimed to have been given access to a Free Republic poster's account to expose a Maryland GOP government appointee who was alleged to have commented on rumors that a Maryland Democratic mayor was an adulterer.
Mosk displayed the same talent for exposing Freepers' identities in today's article that he did in the MD4Bush scandal. However, the only person he exposed then was the Republican. The person (or persons) behind the MD4Bush screen name was not reported by Mosk.
The article Mosk wrote today purports to be about efforts to track down where the 'Obama is a Muslim' allegations began. However, it is actually a warning shot across the bow to opponents of Obama that they will be tracked down and exposed for speaking ill of the Obamessiah.
Mosk even makes sure to let Obamaniacs know who is behind Free Republic and where he can be found:
Of the file folders that are spread in neat rows across Allen's desk, only one is bulging. It holds printouts of the reams of conversations about Obama's religion appearing on Free Republic. Since its start in 1996 by Jim Robinson of Fresno, Calif....
The effort by The Post to protect Obama from rumors is in stark contrast to how they promoted potentially candidacy-damaging rumors eight-years ago.
When George W. Bush ran for president in 1999, The Washington Post led the way in rumor-mongering about whether he used cocaine in his youth. Bush refused to deny cocaine use saying that denying rumors just leads to having to deny more and more rumors. No one ever came forward with allegatons that they had first-hand knowledge of Bush using cocaine, but that didn't stop The Post and the mainstream media as painting Bush as a cokehead. No reporter ever asked Bill Clinton about cocaine use, even though several people known to Clinton claimed to have first-hand knowledge of Clinton using the drug while in public office.
While Mosk ignores The Post's own rumor-mongering, he leaves the impression of Free Republic as the rumor mill of the right. A fair reporter would have noted that Freepers exposed the fraudulent Texas Air National Guard documents that CBS News used in its attempt to derail President Bush's reelection bid in 2004. Buckhead, the Freeper who called foul on the documents, was tracked down by the Los Angeles Times even though he did not post his name on Free Republic.
Mosk's article closes with Allen complaining that the Internet has become as influential as unions and political action committees (PACs) in elections. Unstated is that the political activities of unions and PACs are heavily regulated by the federal government.
Allen seriously misunderstands the right to anonymous political speech--equating political speech with the right of a citizen to face his accuser when charged with a crime by the government:
..."This kind of misinformation campaign short-circuits judgment. It also aggressively disregards the fundamental principle of free societies that one be able to debate one's accusers."
While Mosk and The Post are furiously protecting Obama from the Obama is a Muslim allegation, they steadfstly refuse to report on Obama's well-documented connection to the terrorist supporter and Osama bin Laden sympathizer, Jodie Evans, co-founder of the anti-American group Code Pink.
The Post article claims that the Internet's danger to politics is the ability to spread rumors anonymously. The real danger is the left's willingness to use the Internet to track down and destroy its perceived enemies. Allen and Mosk's teamwork exposing Freepers is one more example of that.
I agree. And the members don't even make much of a comment when they write. It's like reading a chat session without the movement. I guess they don't really have a lengthy opinion anyway, they are just there for the group think.
We were able to get a settlement from them but that meant we could no longer publsih their entire articles and now everyone will have to click on the link and we all know that when you clikc on the links, it generates money.
Jimrob might be able to explain this whole mess better than I can but I think it's quite obvious the mainstream media does not think very highly of conversatives like us here at FR.
And, if they could they'd drive us to bankruptcy.
These people aren't our friends they're our enemies and it certainly in this hit piece by the Post on FR.
I don’t dare let go of my pickup truck...
You can’t use the NY Times to tie Obama to the Islamic call to prayer. That newspaper has been known to make things up before.
It is a crackpot site. < /s >
Am I wrong?
agreed...the more we get under the skin of the lunatic left and their mouthpieces in the liberal media the more it means we are making a difference and making waves...
if no one is paying attention to you no one cares....
well at least in counselling homosexual couples, she doesn’t have to have those uncomfortable drawn out calls with a guy about being some baby’s father and needing to man up on the child support...
I saw that, And I understand Obama Loves the sound of call to prayers ,he says it is one of the sweetest sounds on earth. its quite obvious that he is a muslim
>It is apparent that no faith holds for him over politics. Don’t cling to religion.<
He’s a Halfrican searching for a higher power and I think he believes that he’s it.
Are you suggesting that Obama would throw his religion under the bus for political reasons and flip on issues? How can you be so cynical? He has never been known to make such political moves. He always sticks by his original decisions and has exemplar associates in his background. /s
“Be careful Freepers”
Many conservatives and freepers think of the liberal as wily nily bleeding heart eco-geek pansies. Maybe some of the rank and file, but the cadre of hard core liberals are very dedicated and should not be underestimated. They are expert at conjoining the powers of the governement, media and academia to further their cause “by any means necessary”.
"We will not be swift-boated," said Obama communications director Robert Gibbs. "And we won't take allegations that are patently untrue lying down."Obama's mother, divorced from Obama's father, married a man from Indonesia named Lolo Soetoro, and the family relocated to the country from 1967-71. At first, Obama attended the Catholic school, Fransiskus Assisis, where documents showed he enrolled as a Muslim, the religion of his stepfather.
The document required that each student choose one of five state-sanctioned religions when registering — Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Catholic or Protestant. Gibbs said he wasn't sure why the document had Obama listed as a Muslim.
"Senator Obama has never been a Muslim," Gibbs said. "As a six-year-old in Catholic school, he studied the catechism."
The Illinois senator is a member of the United Church of Christ.
So when and where was he baptised as a Catholic? Did he go through confirmation? First communion?
Or is it like a lapel flag pin and just some ritual that people do for others to show they "care" more about religion than you do?
This is why I contribute to Free Republic!!!!!!......
In Old America, you check books out of library. In Obama’s CHANGED America, library checks you out.
The point is that the pressure works.
yup... and their is a "Bought and Paid For" system too!!! where ours is written by the Robinson's
Isn’t this off-message? I thought the source of the Obama is Muslim rumor was “Jews reading emails” according to Obama and his crew. Now it’s us? What next?
There! I said it, again, and again, and again.
His own brother has said so. Why no expose of him?
Which of the Democrats' new gods would win in a battle for ultimate religious leader between Obama and Gore?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.