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.
Thank you!
Allen is taking drastic steps to protect her investment of $2,850 to the Obama for President Campaign.
Thank you for taking the time to read such a long post. I try not to post things of that length, but my brain has been awhirl for the past week or two.
I was horrified to hear some liberals in our government openly discussing the nationalization of refineries. Granted, they were both moonbat fringe figues in the government, but in my lifetime, to hear it discussed openly was disturbing.
What magnified it for me was that I had just begun re-reading “Atlas Shrugged” a few days before that went down. My timing was impeccable...:(
I may get flamed but, I have business associates that are Muslim and don't consider them all evil. So I stay away from that stuff.
I don’t think muslims are inherently evil or bad, and I think people who do say or imply that are not only wrong, but irresponsible. They may be wrong or misguided in their religion, but that is their right.
There are a lot of muslims out there (and I work with muslims) who want the same things many of us want out of life, and who view the activities of fundamentalists like the Taliban with the same distaste many of us do, especially those who have to live under their gun.
But that isn’t really what this thread is about. It is about Freedom of Speech.
Whoa......just a minute. Isn't it the mainstream press that goes to jail because they won't reveal their sources. I'll bet some reporters for the Washington Post have refused to reveal their sources........
I’m clinging to my religion, guns and FreeRepublic, Post, but I’m not bitter!
Why? Because idolatry is a franchise. And franchisee must aggressively defend his territory and his franchise. Truth can not be franchised because all may seek it or come upon it independently, and owe no franchise fee or fealty to some human lord of the "intellectual property".
The violent-at-core, feral fierceness that liberals, or any idea-mongers anywhere anywhen demand that "it is only this way and no other may be spoken" is a sure sign that what is being sold is a falsehood. In the realm of ideals and ideas it is only false ones that can be claimed by purported sole owners who by all powers available to them will demand that the ideals and ideas be expressed only in ways they allow.
It’s not my job to prove anything to you.
The MSM will build up the Obama-campaign approved bio and go with it and the sheeple will follow... unless you disagree, then it is up to YOU to PROVE otherwise. The approved bio whitewashes any and all Muslim links and makes him out to be a bigger Christian than preacher Huckabee.
His first ad, with a multi-million dollar buy, has him with Kansas values from his grandparents, etc. Never mind that he never set foot in Kansas until he ran for President. You may call it ‘UNACCEPTABLE’ but unless you can PROVE he is lying in his ads, he’s off the hook.
Well written, kristinn. The most disconcerting thing about this WP piece is the effort to research and expose private citizens who are suspected of no crime.
Correction: Allen donated $2,350, not $2,850. (the other $500 was given to Kerry during the last campaign).
What about Gadaffi? Is she going to go after him for his public statements about a "black man who is a muslim named Obama"?
Oh! What about his old teachers??
"At that time, Barry was also praying in a Catholic way, but Barry was Muslim," Dharmawan said in Obama's old classroom, where she still teaches 39 years later. "He was registered as a Muslim because his father, Lolo Soetoro, was Muslim."
Folks better be careful who they are trying to "un-cover", discovery can go both ways.
They want opposition and debate SHUTDOWN as to not interfere with their weak arguments. The Bolshevik Bitch (Also Spelled Nancy) has basically admitted that Pence's Broadcaster Protection bill will never see the light of day while a bill re-introducing the fairness doctrine is coming up (unless BO can get in, then it will be the FCC who lays it on us and ol' Nance is in the clear).
LOL!
Does that mean I should wear a mask when I scan my groceries at the checkout?
Now I know why that woman in there is so impatient for me to put them in the bag faster.
People are griping about the Government’s invasion of their privacy now? As they blab their personal business into their cell phones at the top of their voice? If this poor excuse of a candidate is elected it will give a new meaning to “invasion of privacy”.
The MSM has worked overtime to promote Obama, to elevate him to near-sainthood. I hope and pray the American people are more intelligent than that.
And for those who are upset with the Republican Party and are planning to stay home, we’ll know who to thank when gay marriage is the law in all 50 states and Hillary is sitting on the Supreme Court, for starters.
I don’t think you read my entire reply. If the WAPO (and LA Times) wanted to shut FR down they could have done it very easily by pressing their monetary claims of copyright infringement which included a “per violation” penalty.
They didn’t. They accepted Jims offer of yanking every article already posted and excerpting and linking in the future. To me and others involved this showed they were only interested in protecting their copyrighted properties and setting a legal precedent for future violations.
At that time the anti-freepers were notifying publications about FR. Copyright law is clear that when a potential violation “becomes known” to the holder that they must take action to protect that copyright or they could lose legal protections in the future. If there are small websites who use their work who they don’t go after it’s because they are too small or insignificant to address and can fall back on the excuse that they weren’t aware of it. If they went after every single violation in cyberspace the legal cost on their end would be significant, so they pick and choose the targets to keep their legal costs down and do just enough to be able to claim they are infact attempting to protect those copyrights.
Now you can run around with your pitchfork claiming the sky is falling but all that gets you is tired and hoarse.
If Obama’s father was a Muslim (and he was) - then the child automatically becomes a Muslim.
In the Jewish religion - it’s the mother’s link to the Jewish religion which makes the child of Jewish heritage.
So ..?? I can’t understand why there is so much furor over this .. unless the campaign realizes it would DOOM their candidate if it can be proven Obama was/is a Muslim. And .. now they have to contend with a Muslim becoming a Christian (which Obama purports to be); making Obama an outcast.
This is a great can of worms they have themselves in.
I can think of better candidates than Obama to run against the Clintons. But .. this is the guy they’ve chosen and like all liberals - they will defend him to the end - no matter how horrible or dangerous a person he is.
I did read your entire reply. What I'm simply trying to say here newspapers like the Washington Post will sometimes missuse and abuse their rights under such things as copyright when it suits their own social and political agenda.
And, whether you or anyone else like me saying it or not, the reality is the sky is falling and if we don't do something about it we're going to end up with an America similar to Zimbabwe.
And it is my intention to continue addressing this issue of the mainstream press for as long as it takes for people to get their attention and recgonize that these people don't have the best of intentions.
FR certainly did the right thing to settle this because had they not, it would have gone out of business. Website like FR are very important especially right now since there is a lot at stake in this year's election.
Now, you can poo-poo it all you want but the reality is there's way too much on the line for people like me to just sit down, shut up and except this horrible treatment that we have bee and are continuing to get at the hands of the establishment news media.
I'm fighting back by contributing to two strongly conservative candidates in Colorado--Bob Schaffer (running for the senate seat being resigned by Wayne Allard) and Marilyn Musgrave, whose victories in the 4th congressional district in 2004 and 2006 were extremely narrow.
I will also be doubling my normal quarterly contribution to FR in the July Freepathon.
“Maybe we need a legal case to get this on up to the Supreme Court.”
The case of the mom who posed as a teen on Myspace, the one that led to a teen’s suicide, is an important web anonymity case. It’s discussed at length on FR. The prosecution’s main case is that she fraudulently abused the Myspace servers by logging in as someone other than her own name, age, etc.
I doubt the defense will bring up the importance of anonymity with regard to the Federalist Papers and how those anonymous or pseudonymous essays shaped the constitution.
As for Steg and blowfish et al, that was posted more for everyone than just for you. My intent was to point out that it’s still possible to set up a samizdat network online.
7h3r3 4r3 3v3n 51mp|3 w4y5 70 f00| 4 73x7 5(4nn1n6 807.
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.