Keith Olbermann challenges Sean Hannity; Melissa Doi; waterboarding;

Keith Olbermann has offered to pay Sean Hannity's charity $1,000 for every second that Hannity endures waterboarding.

I have my own offer to make to Keith Olbermann. The idea of paying $1,000 per second is silly. This issue is not about money. This issue is not about charity. Olbermann was trivializing the issue by suggesting a dollar equivalent and Hannity is revealing his own talking-points-straightjacket mentality by invoking charity as a legitimate tradeoff for waterboarding.

Waterboarding has nothing to do with charity. The U.S. waterboarded terrorists to prevent more terrorist attacks. We waterboarded terrorists to prevent another 9-11 or worse. The Obama administration is withholding memos that revealed the extent to which waterboarding prevented terrorism. The Obama administration is not withholding documents to hinder charitable contributions.

The victims of 9-11 endured horrible consequences from the Islamist attacks. The victims did not suffer the mere loss of charitable contributions. The true trade-off is not waterboarding versus charitable contributions. Any true trade-off must involve waterboarding versus another terrorist attack.

So in the spirit of addressing the real issue, I have a proposal for Keith Olbermann. Instead of (or in addition to) waterboarding Sean Hannity for charity, Keith Olbermann can waterboard me. I will give up my previous anonymity and, with Olbermann's consent, go to a location of Olbermann's choosing so that Olbermann can waterboard me. But first, Olbermann must do something that I want. And what I want is the equivalent of what we prevented by waterboarding.

Olbermann has several options:

1) Since the 9-11 victims endured incineration in their own offices from the burning planes in Towers One and Two, Olbermann must endure the same. Olbermann must be enclosed in a small space the size of an office. The office must be doused with jet fuel and filled with plastic, carpet and other items that emit thick black smoke when they burn. The fuel must be ignited so that it becomes a roaring inferno. For every second that Olbermann endures the inferno without begging for mercy, he can waterboard me. Here is a sample of a 9-11 tape showing what some of the victims endured. The voice is Melissa Doi, who died near the top of the World Trade Center.



Melissa Doi died on that day, Keith, but you will be able to walk away.

Melissa Doi

Keith, can you endure the flames, smoke and fumes as long as she did?











Since Olbermann probably will be afraid to endure that challenge, I have some other options for him.

2) One of the terrorist attacks that we prevented would have blown up several airliners over the Atlantic Ocean simultaneously. Had any passengers survived the explosions, they would have landed in the ocean without a parachute or other safety equipment. Olbermann can jump out of an airplane high over the middle of the Atlantic Ocean without a parachute or other equipment. If he somehow makes it back to New York, he can waterboard me for as long as he likes.

3) The main attack we are trying to prevent is a dirty bomb or a suitcase bomb in the middle of Manhattan or other American city. I don't know all of the consequences from such an attack, but we can compare it to Hiroshima. Temperatures from the Hiroshima blast reached 7,200 degrees Fahrenheit. The future victims of the Islamists' next terrorist attack may have to endure such temperatures. If Obama's Department of Energy will recreate those conditions for Olbermann, we may have a deal. For every second that Olbermann can endure 7,200 degree temperature, he can waterboard me for one second. This option becomes more appropriate as the area of Taliban domination in Pakistan creeps closer to the capital in Islamabad and control of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal.

But he probably does not want to choose options ## 2 or 3 because those options would be fatal. Olbermann probably does not want to choose option #1 because too many of his viewers believe that 9-11 was a hoax perpetrated by Dick Cheney. He does not want to be seen by his viewers taking any action that recognizes the existence of an event in which they refuse to believe.

For that reason, I offer one final option:

4) Olbermann can allow a doctor to peel away a large patch of skin from his body and pour a strong salt solution over the wound. Also, Olbermann will drink the solution. For every pint of the salt solution that he drinks, he can then waterboard me for one second. He probably cannot accept this option either, because it would make public one of the procedures for abortion. Not only has abortion become a religion for his viewers, but the very denial of the cruelty of this procedure is just as much of a religion for those same viewers.

Because Olbermann cannot accept any of these options (as much for ideological reasons as for any concern for his own safety), Olbermann will pretend that this challenge was never made. He will continue to express bravado on the air as he attacks talking-point Republicans like Hannity, pretends that 9-11 never happened, ignores the Taliban's growing control over Pakistan and decries "torture" while defending "a woman's right to choose."

Notes from around the blogosphere

Michele from New York comments on the true and ongoing cost of 9-11. As bad it was (and is), the next one will be worse.

G-Man posts an update on Hassan Abujihaad. If you don't remember who that is, check out the link.

Uncivil Rights comments on the Boston Globe following the lead of the ladies on The View.

Doug Ross puts the Democrats' war strategy/domestic pork issue in perspective.

The Captain compares Mitt Romney's current positions with his very recent advocacy of leftist causes. The Captain points out that it is no wonder conservatives are still looking toward Fred Thompson.

CNN 9-11 coverage; Jeff Greenfield; the day America's luck ran out

Click here for previous commentary of CNN's 9-11 news coverage.

As I noted earlier, CNN reran (on its "Pipeline" website) its coverage of the September 11 attacks. Another item I noted was the commentary of Jeff Greenfield. At one point, Greenfield listed some of the attacks that had occured during the previous few years, such as the first WTC bombing (in 1993), the USS Cole and the foiled millenium bombing. He stated that we had been lucky thus far, but today was apparently the day that our luck had run out. [I believe I am paraphrasing pretty closely here.]

I think a parallel is developing with current events in Iran. We have been lucky thus far that Iran (or Al Qaeda, etc.) has not delivered a nuclear device for detonation in Manhattan. The day will come when our luck runs out again and it will make 9-11 look mild by comparison.

As CCN viewers listened to Greenfield's comments on 9-11-01, I imagine many of them wished we had done more to protect ourselves after each of the previous events that he listed. We have that chance now. We have the chance to disarm Iran NOW before its nuclear program is complete and before it destroys a major American city. We have the chance to avoid the mistakes of the 1990's. I don't want to find myself sitting in front of a TV someday listening to future commentators tell us that our luck has run out yet again as we desparately await news from a 10 mile radius around a flattened and glowing New York City.

9-11 coverage - CNN, accident theory, navigation error

Click here for an earlier post commenting on vhs tapes of the news coverage of the 9-11 attacks.

This morning I have been watching CNN's website, at which CNN is transmitting a repeat of its live coverage from 9-11-2001. I find all of it fascinating, but one item stands out in particular.

Watching live coverage at about 9:00 in the morning, one can clearly see the north tower burning. As the CNN commentators speak, one can see an airplane fly into the south tower, followed by an explosion. The commentators keep talking as if they hadn't noticed. The commentators then begin speculating that a second explosion has occured at the scene of the north tower. This second explosion supports the theory that the first plane was still inside the north tower and was still exploding, according to the CNN commentator.

The point is that the commentators did not notice the second plane hitting the WTC even as it appeared on the screen. They began attributing the damage caused by the second plane to other causes at the wrong tower. This discussion continued for several minutes.

Even after the CNN anchors acknowledged that a different plane had hit each tower, they refused to acknowledge the possibility of terrorism or an intentional attack. For at least 15 minutes after the second plane hit, the anchors speculated as to what kind of navigation error could cause two commercial jets to crash into the World Trade Center in the same morning. They speculated as to some sort of homing beacon gone awry. They discussed the normal flight paths and the distance between Battery Park and the airports. The continued on this theme until some government source stated that this must be a terrorist act.

This commentary stands in marked contrast to the immediate reactions of ordinary people, such as those who commented on Howard Stern's radio program at the same time. Various callers and Stern's own people immediately jumped to the obvious conclusion that terrorism was the cause of these crashes. I recall my own reaction (and those of my co-workers) being the same.

This coverage leads me to two thoughts.

(1) The MSM/DNC is so paralyzed by a PC, defeatist attitude that they cannot even acknowledge the possibility that an attack has taken place until long after it becomes obvious to everyone else.

(2) The moonbats might have seen this presentation this morning and gotten more ideas for their "inside job" theory. They may begin theorizing that the CIA directed the planes into the buildings by remote control homing devices so that George Bush could start a war.

The first mention of Osama bin Laden came at 9:55 A.M., maybe a half-hour or more after CNN first acknowledged the terrorist angle (upon government prompting). CNN then noted that the administration had previously (prior to 9-11) issued a warning that bin Laden might attack American targets.

I do applaud CNN for rebroadcasting its coverage over the internet today.

Michelle Malkin posts commemorations.

9-11 news coverage - the fifth hijack team

In 2003, I posted the following on a Yahoo discussion group after reviewing my VHS tapes that I recorded within a day or two after 9-11. It is interesting how much one forgets after a couple of years. The news coverage of any event is never the same as the initial reports. Details are forgotten and bias creeps in as the MSM/DNC gets its story straight and discovers its theme. But when one watches the initial reports from the day in question, one sees details that do not fit the MSM/DNC theme. Here is the quote from my post in 2003:

This weekend I dusted off a couple of video tapes containing
recordings I made from news broadcasts in the days immediately
following September 11. The broadcasts are full of very revealing
information that takes on added significance in light of the events
of the past 22 months.

We all know what happened on September 11, but we don't remember
many details that, upon reflection, shed light on the attitudes of
the newscasters, the bias of the networks and the extent to which we
all have forgotten how widespread is the terror network.

I won't rehash many details, but I can give you a few highlights:

1) The networks reported that at least one additional group of
5 middle eastern men had been confronted on the morning of the 11th at a New
York airport trying to board a plane with boxcutters. When questioned,
they left the airport. They have never been identified so far as we
know.

Questions - Why haven't the networks spent some time investigating the
whereabouts of this terror team instead of trying to impeach Bush because of
contrived questions over the exact source of Saddam's uranium?
The government arrested hundreds of muslims in the days following
9/11. Were these men among the detained? Is it possible they are in custody
now? If not, then we have at least one suicide team roaming free awaiting
orders.

If any of you made recordings of news reports on the 11th or shortly thereafter,
now would be a good time to watch them. You will be surprised at the details
you may have forgotten.

Quote of the day - Mark Steyn - FAA utopia

The commercial airliner is an Al Gore dream. There is no smoking. There is 100% gun control. You are by obliged by law to do everything the cabin crew tell you to do. If the stewardess is rude to you, tough. If you’re rude to her, there’ll be officers waiting to arrest you when you land. The justification for all this is a familiar one - that in return for surrendering individual liberties, we’ll all be collectively better off. That was the deal: do as you’re told, and the Federal Aviation Administration will look after you.

Last Tuesday morning, the FAA failed spectacularly to honour their end of the bargain – as I’m sure the terrorists knew they would. By all accounts, they travelled widely during the long preparations for their mission, and they must have seen that an airline cabin is the one place where, thanks to the FAA, you can virtually guarantee you’ll meet no resistance. Indeed, in their FAA-mandated coerciveness the average coach-class cabin is the nearest the western world gets to the condition of those terrorists’ home states.

Mark Steyn - September 22, 2001

Quote of the day - Bill Quick - Daily Pundit - Moussaoui

Well, while Moussaoui parades around prison as a hero to many of the inmates, we'll get a real-world education in how important he actually was to the 9/11 massacre, after the first round of hostages are taken in the middle east in order to demand his release.

Bill Quick - Daily Pundit

Mark Steyn, Michelle Malkin, Invasion, immigration

Mark Steyn's column today references Michelle Malkin's book, Invasion, in which she recounts one of the disastrous consequences of U.S.' lax immigration policy:

In Michelle Malkin's book Invasion, she recounts the tale of two fellows who in August 2001 pulled into a 7-Eleven parking lot in Falls Church, Va., in search of fake ID from the illegal-alien assistance network that hangs around there. Luis Martinez-Flores, who'd been living here illegally since 1994, took them along to the local DMV, supplied them with a fake address and falsely certified they lived there. The very next day, the two guys returned with two pals of their own, and used their own brand-new state ID on which the ink was not yet dry to obtain in turn brand-new state ID for their buddies. A couple of weeks later, all four of them used their Virginia ID to board American Airlines Flight 77 at Dulles Airport and plowed it into the Pentagon.

We had better stop reciting platitudes and start thinking about our own survival.



previous citation to Steyn's April 9, 2006 column.

Quote of the day - Tom Shales

"Jennings wanted to know, he said, how anyone could hate America so much that they would launch this kind of vicious, calamitous attack. Ashrawi [Palestinian propagandist] blamed U.S. foreign policy (for having 'fought Arab nationalism') and, predictably for her, Israel. Ashrawi complained that 'Israel is given preferential treatment, treated as a country above the law, as part of her condemnation. Jennings deferred to Ashrawi, as usual, and let her filibuster. It was a nauseating display...."

Tom Shales - 9-17-01

Quote of the day - TVspy.com - Peter Jennings

"It's no surprise that ABC News anchor Peter Jennings allowed Palestinian proselytizer Hanan Ashrawi to peddle propaganda on his program [9-11 coverage] -- she used to be his girlfriend. U.S. News & World Report noted in 1991: 'In the early 1970s, when he was single and head of the ABC bureau in Beirut, Jennings dated Ashrawi, who at the time was also single and a graduate student in literature at the American University in the Lebanese capital. Jennings was introduced to Ashrawi's parents and sisters and became part of her circle of friends.

In 1995, Denver Rocky Mountain News international editor Holger Jensen... [wrote] about staying at the Commodore Hotel in Beirut while covering events in war-torn Lebanon. Jensen recalled that Jennings stayed there as well, 'courting a long succession of Palestinian lovelies including Hanan Ashrawi."

TVspy.com (September 20, 2001)

Quote of the day - Tom Shales, Peter Jennings

"[Jennings] hosted what looked like a little intercontinental tea party for alleged experts on the Middle East, one of whom was professional Palestinian spokeswoman Hanan Ashrawi, whom Jennings hailed as 'widely known in the United States.' Also widely disliked. Jennings and Ashrawi greeted each other like old pals, with broad smiles and warm greetings. "

Tom Shales, Washington Post, September 17, 2001 (referring to Peter Jennings 9/11 coverage).