The Joe Blow Report 2

Everything Is About Something Different

Archive for the ‘Journalist’ Category

Who Is Ali Farzat?

leave a comment »

I found this story posted on Cartoon Movement August 26, 2011:  Cartoonist Attacked by Syrian Regime compliments of Mike Flugennock at Sinkers.org.

This is what the scum of the Earth do to try to tell other people that they really are the worthless garbage. Every person on this Earth that believes they are decent, God-fearing, freedom-loving people have a vested interest in what’s done to their fellow men and women.

While the world’s media focus is on Libya and the downfall of Gaddafi, let us not forget that editorial cartoonists elsewhere are struggling for freedom. Well-known Syrian cartoonist Ali Farzat was brutally attacked by masked men, who broke his hands (to stop him drawing) and left him on the road outside Damascus. A stark reminder of the dangers cartoonists can face, but also of how they are feared by oppressors.

The comics blog at the Washington Post has called for cartoonists from all over the globe to draw cartoons in support of Ali Farzat. We hope to see some of these in our newsroom.


All the Christian and Non-Christian do-gooders that are all the time preaching love and forgiveness in their hearts are hardly any consolation to this man, and the lucky ones that were NOT murdered. President Barack Obama and his enablers’ gutless, feckless blather and non-action are no consolation either.

As someone that occasionally feels the wrath for speaking out about the obvious, here’s Mike’s offering:

–Joe

The Truth – MacLeod Cartoon

leave a comment »

Debt Ceiling – the Media Narrative

Want the truth? Well, there it is.

–Joe

Shoe On Other Foot

with 3 comments

When I first looked to see what Dave Stancliff had written in his Sunday As It Stands opinion column I thought,
“here he goes again – preaching more lawless, mob rule.” After reading the article I decided not to make any observations – the whole thing was way too trite.

So, what changed my mind? You don’t suppose I could pass up another golden opportunity to excoriate Dave Stancliff, do you?

Actually, no. What griped me is the constant drum-beat for more laws to deprive everyone of what freedom, justice and accountability remains in our corrupt society. “Frivolous lawsuits” are just that, FRIVOLOUS.

When every deck there is, is totally stacked against the average working and retired man and woman in this country, using one Mickey Mouse lawsuit to fill newspaper space railing against “frivolous lawsuits” does everyone a disservice. Rather than denigrate the injured, he would have better served everyone had he spent the time and word dealing with the real cause of the problems: greedy, self-serving and amoral lawyers.

Let’s set the matter right – right up front, I don’t have any use for lawyers. First, its been my experience, that they all believe they are better than everyone else. If for no other reason than they are in a position to victimize the people that are forced to use them. The judges in this country think they are too good to speak to or recognize the “common” man. So they breed this special class of royalty that judges will accept past their Bar. Second, if you don’t have the money to pay their exorbitant fees, despite the fact that they are employed by you, the “fee” payer, they exercise their right to betray you, to the detriment and harm to you, your business and your family’s best interest. Even if you have the money, where “money” is no issue, they still treat you like some sub-human, low-class pile of dog crap.

Since that’s pretty much the bottom line when it comes to lawyers, for me personally today, whenever I have a problem, rather than look to a lawyer to purportedly speak in my behalf, I deal directly and personally. Since the gutless, effeminate paranoid have passed so many laws today restricting speech, the safe possibility to personally resolve ANY matter by simple speech (communicating by letter, email, telephone or personally) – actually talking to one another, I realize this is a rather precarious solution. That’s the way people used to settle their problems. So, what’s happened?

Well, in Mr. Stancliff’s case, the “shoe’s on the other foot.”

It wasn’t too long ago that Dave Stancliff was threatening to take me to court for writing an observation or two about his newspaper column. Despite the fact that he was making all kinds of outlandish accusation, from where I stand, that was about as “frivolous” as it could get. His “threats” were not “frivolous,” but the basis he set forth certainly was.

What have we recently learned about how we are justified in dealing with people that makes threats? What was the justification President Obama gave for going to war with Muammar Gaddafi and Libya? His, Gaddafi’s “threat.”

There’s another lesson learned here and that is when you don’t communicate, and I am not talking about arbitrary ultimatums either, the only other way to resolve issues is WAR. The choice: either talk peacefully or act violently. When people refuse to recognize your legitimate rights to exist same as them and then act on that belief refusing to talk to you, they are at de facto war with you.

The best solution is to work out the problems personally – peacefully – one on one. Whenever you bring in a surrogate to speak for you or act in your behalf, you are ostensibly at war. No one ever wins at war. Yet, it seems, that is a lesson few if any wannabe elitist Americans have learned.

April Fool’s Day today, right?

–Joe

Truth and the Free Press

leave a comment »

Glenn Greenwald has a good article on Salon.com today that needs to be highlighted:

The media’s authoritarianism and WikiLeaks

Also Digby’s latest:

More Journalistic Malpractice In Service Of The Powerful


The news media are not even trying to hide their lies and lying.

–Joe

Written by Joe Blow

December 10, 2010 at 8:18 pm

Authoritarianism’s Pretty Face

leave a comment »

WikiLeak’s enlightening revelations are truly revealing within themselves. Perhaps we can all agree or conclude that absolutely nothing government says is true – everything is a lie. We should, therefore, proceed from that premise and then move on to the truth.

More than that, however, are the raw edges exposed by this light. It seems there’s been a confluence of disparate individuals that’s come together to achieve the same goals. This is what usually happens when there’s a major change taking place, but only obvious to few people. Here’s a good example of a raw edge illustrated by Glenn Greenwald in his latest column:

(5) Speaking of authoritarianism, the loathsome Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) — the National-Security-State-venerating Chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee who lives off her defense contractor-husband’s vast wealth — announced that she supports re-writing and expanding the Espionage Act of 1917 to make it easier to prosecute WikiLeaks and those like them; asalways, Feinstein abuses her role as Chair of the “oversight” Committee not to scrutinize and limit the abuses of the intelligence community but to protect them at all costs, as that’s where her source of wealth and power lie.  She was responding to yesterday’s announcement that Joe Lieberman — joined by GOP Senators Scott Brown and John Ensign — introduced a bill intended to make it easier to prosecute Assange.  Exactly as Dowd says, when it comes to authoritarian punishments for those who dare to expose what the U.S. Government does, the mindset is entirely bipartisan.

Glenn updates this column with: The lawless Wild West attacks WikiLeaks – It should be “attacks America.”

A review of Glenn’s recent articles lays out in fairly stark and graphic terms what’s happened to America and what it is doing to the world as a consequence. Everyone seems only to be concerned about how the WikiLeaks revelations affects America. The problem is how the rest of the world see America after the facts and what they are going to do about it. Glenn says:

All the oppressive, lawless policies of the last decade — lawless detention, Guantanamo, disappearing people to CIA black sites, rendition, the torture regime, denial of habeas corpus, drones, assassinations, private mercenary forces, etc. — were designed, first and foremost, to instill exactly this fear, to deter any challenge.   Many of these policies continue, and that climate of fear thus endures (see this comment from today as but one of many examples).  As the treatment just thus far of WikiLeaks and Assange demonstrates, that reaction — though paralyzing and counter-productive — is not irrational.  And one thing is for sure:  there is nothing the U.S. Government could do — no matter how lawless or heinous — which (with rare exception) would provoke the objections of the American establishment media.

UPDATE II:  Those wishing to donate to WikiLeaks can still do so here, via Options 2 (online credit card) or 3 (wire to bank in Iceland).

Latest Update: Dan Gilmore writes (click the title link for the article):

Defend WikiLeaks or lose free speech

Journalists should wake up and realize that the attacks on the whistle-blower are attacks on them, too

–Joe

On The Docket

leave a comment »

police_officer_cartoonThe Humboldt Herald Blog posted the following June 29, 2009: “Eureka Police blog spawns lawsuit.” According to the article, “The lawsuit alleges libel and intentional infliction of emotional distress” and “at the center of the controversy is a blog” that, according to the Herald, “largely contained petty, personal gripes” and that the suit “alleges the blog contained false statements.”

Why is this important to the Joe Blow Report? Take a look at the very first person to make a comment. The name is DAVE. Click that link and you go to the local Web blog, ‘As It Stands’ by Dave Stancliff. Look around that blog and you come to these two articles he posted about me: 1)  Trolls Exposed: what kind of troll is disrupting your online community? and 2)  Joe Blow (conspiracy) Report staff bawl like babies!

Read what he says about me and my Report and it is about as libelous as anyone can get!

The question is, has he and all of his libel caused injury? Obviously, no one is free to say anything they want just because it’s a blog. Yet some people do. More importantly, this matter was taken to the Times-Standard newspaper here in Eureka, because they publish his “As It Stands” column. I wonder if they would continue to do so if Dave Stancliff found himself facing a similar lawsuit.

Ironically, everything that was initially written in our article, “Trolls and The Thought Police” about one of Dave Stancliff’s columns was born out to be true. No less by Dave Stancliff himself. Unfortunately for him, he’ll never know if or when we suffer damage as a consequence of his libel.

By the way, my Report article was NOT about Dave Stancliff; it was not personal. It was about the issues he raise in his newspaper column and the travesty people of his ilk have caused decent law-abiding Americans.

–Joe

Hate Speech – Is There A Law?

leave a comment »

hate speech not freeWhat is “hate speech”? Is it protected by the First Amendment?

The Joe Blow Report asserts that Dave Stancliff, Columnist for the Times-Standard newspaper, engaged in hate speech in his two blog articles listed here and here. More importantly, the language he uses depicts and defines the Report’s writer(s) as some sort of insane, “Lone Wolf” right-wing, hate-group of domestic terrorist — a form of racism.

Hate speech is a term for speech intended to degrade, intimidate, or incite violence or prejudicial action against a person or group of people based on their race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, moral or political views, socioeconomic class, occupation or appearance (such as height, weight, and hair color), mental capacity and any other distinction that might be considered by some as a liability. The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting.

It is also sometimes called antilocution and is the first point on Allport’s scale which measures prejudice in a society. Critics have claimed that the term “Hate Speech” is a modern example of Newspeak, used to silence critics of social policies that have been poorly implemented in a rush to appear politically correct. [Partial definition from Wikipedia: Hate Speech — Read complete here.]

Then there is the Urban Dictionary’s definition for “racism”:

If you’re a white man, this is what you are. It doesn’t even matter if your wife is black and you have an adopted child from India, or how many black friends you have, somehow you’re going to end up being a racist according to how the media portrays the white man as “racist whities”.

The website “Knowledgerush” says this about “racist hate speech”:

Various institutions in the United States and Europe began developing codes to limit or punish hate speech in the 1990s, on the grounds that such speech amounts to discrimination. Thus, such codes prohibit words or phrases deemed to express, either deliberately or unknowingly, hatred or contempt towards a group of people, based on areas such as their ethnic, cultural, religious or sexual identity, or with reference to physical or mental heath.
It may also in some contexts challenge the rights of individuals based on any or all of the above criteria. In many countries, deliberate use of ‘hate speech’ is a criminal offence prohibited under incitement to hatred legislation. (Emphasis added)

The term “racist” is used to identify Stancliff’s commentary because he is determined to identify and define — stereotype this writer according to his own opinionated prejudices.

Notice what Stancliff says about me:

They checked in again Monday when I posted a reply to their insanity.
Whoever they are, they’re not oo bright!
June 17, 2009 7:33 AM

If you call someone a terrorist just because they don’t agree with you, are you then free to treat them like a terrorist?

False accusers are liars. Liars are murderers. Everyone that supports a liar is also a liar and a murderer.

–Joe

Joe Blow’s Email NO Joke

leave a comment »

These are the Report’s emails to the Times-Standard staff and management regarding their publishing Dave Stancliff’s web column called “As It Stands.” Managing Editor, Kimberly Wear, sent back her response noted below.

Attention Dave Kuta, Kimberly Wear and James Faulk:

On June 4, 2009, I sent the enclosed email (posted here) to the following people listed on your website Contact Page, namely Dave Kuta Publisher, Kimberly Wear Managing Editor and James Faulk City Editor. My purpose was to determine what involvement, if any, the Times-Standard newspaper and its managing staff had in promoting, supporting and legitimizing Dave Stancliff and his “As It Stands” column written both in your newspaper and on his Internet blog of the same name. Publishing his column in the Sunday, June 14, 2009, issue of your paper defacto stipulates that what Dave Stancliff said about me and my blog was, in fact, you and your paper’s position simply written by him. Accordingly, his slanderous personal assault, designed to intimidate, destroy and terrorize, was fomented by you. To publicly accuse someone of “spewing hate” is to equate that person with the murderous, hate mongers that run amok in our society terrorizing and murdering innocent people. Identifying me and anyone else associated with the Joe Blow Report by you and your paper as such produces a very real physical threat to us, not only the community at large, but by the authorities. You people took this to a personal extreme when you said this and continue to legitimize Dave Stancliff:


Wednesday, June 3, 2009

Trolls Exposed: what kind of troll is disrupting your online community?

troll

I’ve encountered Satanists – The Wren’s Nest who ran my July 20, 2008 column IRS Recognized The Church of Satan as a Religion

and now I’ve strolled into a troll’s cave….

UPDATE JUNE 3rd

Check out The Joe Blow Report blog.

What’s really interesting about “Joe Blow” is that he’s threatening me –

to paraphrase:

“If he (Dave) honestly thought I, or any of us, were actually paranoid and hostile as he claimed, I doubt he would have the termerity, let alone the courage to say it directly to me.”

What does a coward afraid to use his own name think he’s doing by questioning my courage?

I made the mistake of making a comment on his (their) little hate-filled blog because he (they) devoted a post to attacking my column on trolls. Please read his (their) blog and see what you think. I probably should have realized he (they) are a paranoid lot of losers and just let them be. The thinly veiled threats warning me that I didn’t have a clue who I was talking to is just further proof of the hate that is spewing out from The Joe Blow Report blog.

-Dave

Dave Stancliff/For the Times-Standard

Posted: 05/31/2009 01:27:12 AM PDT

Don’t feed the trolls.

You know the ones I’m talking about. They prey on news forums, chat rooms, and other online communities. Their purpose: to disrupt any conversation or thread, and to get an emotional response from some unwary person. Ignoring them and not responding to their posts is your best option.

What kind of people are trolls? They’re cowards. Lonely cowards. Their posts seldom show any real imagination and often resort to childish name-calling.


Neither I, Joe Blow nor the Joe Blow Report took Dave Stancliff or any of you at your paper personally to task over the issue of online terrorist “Trolls” and their counterpart “Thought Police” or for whatever you write or do not write. Even at such times that we find your Editorials and other article’s personally repulsive, we maintain our objectivity and remain personally uninvolved. Only the weak-minded, mentally sick and socially immature reacts the way Dave Stancliff has. Stancliff says, among other things, hate “spews” from my blog. Yet, the only evidence of hate is written in his personal foul accusations against us and in his blog statements copied above. He also says we threaten him by noting that he, and all of you for that matter, know who we are. For your information, that point was made to demonstrate the base stupidity of Stancliff’s tirade. Which is consistent with our initial observation regarding the draconian consequences of “simpleminded people.” What does that say about you people and your Times-Standard newspaper? Do you support or repudiate “hate speakers” and demagogues? As long as you publish his “As It Stands” column, the facts speak for themselves. Everyone that familiarizes themselves of this matter knows exactly what you think about me and my Report.

If someone wants to come into my home or on my property and tell me what they think of me and “spew” their worthless, lying opinions, that’s one thing. I can kick them out of my home and off my property and that’s generally the end of it. If they try to come back I can always stop them at the door or lock my gate. However, if they go around to each and everyone one of my neighbors spewing their bile and letting them post defamatory signs about me and my family, that is an altogether different situation. Now, instead of only having one person to deal with, I have potentially all my adjoining neighbors at my door spewing and repeating this person’s hate-filled bile and assaulting me and my family in their behalf. The consequences of that are serious, traumatic, potentially fatal, and for that reason generally illegal. Today, however, there is a witch hunt going on for anyone even vaguely associated with hate-mongering, hate speech, white supremacists, associated groups or just plain “angry white men.” Dave Stancliff stepped over that line and your support justifies his continued intolerable behavior.

The last thing any of us need is for someone in authority to believe there is some truth to his accusations.

Sincerely,
Joe Blow
http://joeblowreport.blogspot.com/

Well, we know today what involvement the Times-Standard newspaper and its managing staff had in promoting, supporting and legitimizing Dave Stancliff and his “As It Stands” column written both in their newspaper and on his Internet blog of the same name.

When there was no response to this email and I noticed that Stancliff had written another article on his web, I sent the following email:

Dear Dave Kuta, Kimberly Wear and James Faulk:

On June 16, 2009, I sent you another email about the dangerous ground Dave Stancliff is treading accusing me and everyone he thinks is associated with the Joe Blow Report, among other things, of being radical, “hate-filled,” “extremists.” We intend to determine if you are complicit in enabling him to continue his personal attacks. If I ever needed more proof to substantiate our observations, let me offer you this, his latest shameful exhibition posted on his “As It Stands” blog:


Monday, June 15, 2009

Joe Blow (conspiracy) Report staff bawl like babies!

Well readers, this is what I have to contend with sometimes. Extremists tend to attack anything that doesn’t fit their world view. There’s a group at the Joe Blow Report blog that decided to attack me on May 31st and who posted a hate-filled rant about a column I did on trolls (of all the ironies!) This is a group that has the mind-set of a steel trap.

Now they have their crying towels (it took them two weeks to think of a reply) out and are blubbering to all that will read their raving. I’m not going to be intimidated by a bunch of cowards who are whining about a conspiracy between me and the Times-Standard to attack trolls! Good grief! Get a life you blowhards.

I don’t know who you think you are, but I do know that you seek to impose your will upon others by reading your past posts. Now you think you can silence me by making outrageous accusations and trying to get the newspaper to drop my column. Guess again gang. You’ll never be able to silence me. You best bet is to change your soiled diapers and to find someone else to pick on!


To repeat, if all Dave Stancliff did was demonstrate himself on Internet blogs and personal websites we would consider the source, make the necessary observations and move on. But he doesn’t just write on the Internet, does he? He’s right up there writing just like you, James Faulk, isn’t he, representing the newspaper with his weekly columns? What’s next? You people going to publish one of his “As It Stands” columns about the Joe Blow Report and make these accusations legitimate?

Too bad Mr. Stancliff did not live his own advice and just keep quiet. Instead he proves everything first observed. So, I ask you, what does that say about you people? What does it say about the integrity of the Time-Standard? You continue to publish his columns.

Sincerely,

Joe Blow
http://joeblowreport.blogspot.com

 

This time I got a response!

Managing Editor, Kimberly Wear’s email reply to the Joe Blow Report:

To whom it may concern,

These issues have nothing to do with the Times-Standard newspaper. This is an issue between you and Mr. Stancliff and your respective blogs. He is not a Times-Standard employee nor do his views neccesarily reflect the views of this newspaper.

Best,
Kimberly Wear

This was my reply to Kimberly Wear dated 6/17/09:

To Kimberly Wear:

Thank you for responding to my email.

You could say that if you did not publish his column. His column in your newspaper is the same name as his blog – As It Stands. What he says on his blog he says in your newspaper. Your statement, “These issues have nothing to do with the Times-Standard newspaper” is disingenuous when you say,”nor do his views neccesarily reflect the views of this newspaper.” That was my point, his views are your views – “necessarily” or not. He made that a fact when he drug the Times-Standard newspaper into this when he began publicly attacking me personally. Not everyone in this community shares these views. Nor do they wish to be associated with or, in fact, enable such disreputable conduct.

That’s the problem isn’t it Ms. Wear? Saying does not make is so. It’s what you do that speaks to the truth. What Dave Stancliff did is posted on his web for the whole world to see. Remove his word “gang” at the Joe Blow Report and replace it with gay, Mormon, Negro, Mexican, Muslim or Jew and you have indisputable racist, hate speech. More than that, any rational person with a modicum of objectivity without any definition from me, can clearly see are the words of someone that is belligerent, hysterical, sick and unstable.

When you publish a weekly column that I write, equal to his, then you can hide behind your irresponsible behavior.

Sincerely,
Joe Blow Report

Her response was to run the “As It Stands” column in the Sunday, June 23, 2009, edition of the Times-Standard newspaper. On Father’s Day they credentialed his, “A Father’s thoughts about closing the gap between centuries and generations.” He closed by saying, “As It Stands, Happy Father’s Day to the rest of you Dads everywhere! Do you think was including me – a paranoid extremist?

He says, “I try to provide them (his three sons) with love, understanding, and the knowledge that they can ask me anything.” Perhaps, they should ask him if he practices what he preaches?

How do you teach love and understanding or provide any type of meaningful knowledge when you are a self-manifest liar and practice hate? The guiding principle here was set down by the teachings of Jesus Christ according to someone that walked with him:

If anyone says, “I love God,” yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen.

By the way, Jesus said:

He answered: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.'”

Jesus also said:

“I give you a new commandment: that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you should also love one another. By this all people will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

(Return to the Joe Blow Report on Blogspot.)

–Joe

Greenwald Nails the Whores in America

leave a comment »

greenwald_artBritain’s bizarre reaction to war crimes allegations: investigations needed

Preventing a judicial ruling on the power to imprison without charges


Amy Goodman reports: Lawmakers Debate Establishing “Truth Commission” on Bush Admin Torture, Rendition and Domestic Spying

MICHAEL RATNER, human right attorney and president of the Center for Constitutional Rights and author of the book The Trial of Donald Rumsfeld:

 You know, I won’t say I’m exactly biased here, but I think essentially that the Leahy commission is an excuse for non-prosecution. It’s essentially saying, “Let’s put some stuff on the public record. Let’s immunize people. And then,” as he even said, “let’s turn the page and go forward.” That’s really an excuse for non-prosecution. And in the face of what we’ve seen in this country, which is essentially a coup d’etat, a presidential dictatorship and torture, it’s essentially a mouse-like reaction to what we’ve seen. And it’s being set up really by a liberal establishment that is really, in some ways, in many ways, on the same page as the establishment that actually carried out these laws. And it’s saying, “OK, let’s expose it, and then let’s move on.”

And he even says, he says what we’re going to do with the truth commission is we’re going to look and see what mistakes were made. I mean, just ask the hundred people who were tortured in the secret sites about what mistakes were made, or ask the 750 people at Guantanamo, or ask the people at Abu Ghraib. This is not about mistakes. This is about fundamental lawbreaking, about the disposal of the Constitution, and about the end of treaties. So I think, actually, that Leahy’s current proposal is extremely dangerous. I call it the lame commission or basically an excuse for non-prosecution.

Joe’s got some “HOPE” to sell. Real cheap.
–Joe
%d bloggers like this: