And include the places where their spouses shop, as the New York Slimes did.
Their action is so shocking and disgusting that I am almost speechless. I just wish I hadn't stopped getting this rag 5 months ago because now I can't write them and cancel my subscription in anger.
LEt's not stop with the NYT but include the LATimes and CNN. These are terrorist organizations anyway.
Thanks for making this public.
I can not believe anyone else is commenting on this terrorist behavior from this organization. How far has the NYT terrorists fallen!
Amazing.
They think they're untouchable, and they have plenty of reasons to think so. No matter how many secrets they leak, no matter how much criminal libel they print about the Bush administration, no matter how many times the courts allow them to break the law in the name of "freedom of the press," The President shrinks and looks the other way.
This has emboldened them. They will continue to get even worse unless Congress or the President does something about it.
I've got to hand it to you Rocco, outing these bullying terrorists is a great idea.
Dan Riehl at Riehl Word View has #1 already done. Sulzbereger has a lovely place. I particularly admire the schooling ring for the horses.
http://www.riehlworldview.com/
ca..._the_big_d.html
Yes this is a reasonable idea. If these socialist swine we call journalists dont care much for our security and safety that they will bend over backwards to compromise it , we should do whatever it takes to compromise their security and privacy
I doubt the NYT photographer would've been able to photograph Rumsfeld's house without the permission and cooperation of the Secret Service, who guard it. Rumsfeld's and Cheney's homes are well known and have been written about extensively. For example: Newsmax, Forbes, International Herald Tribune, Washington Post, Boston Globe, Salon, General Aviation News and many others. Just do a google search of Rumsfeld's house, which is called Mount Misery, and you'll get lots of hits. The same goes for Cheney's $2.9 million weekend home, which is called Ballintober. Or you could drop by St. Michael's Carpenter Street Saloon, where you can not only learn where Rumsfeld and Cheney live, but you might even see them in the saloon. Both homes are in the public domain and they're heavily protected by the Secret Service.
But the NYT photographer's home isn't in the public domain and it isn't protected by the Secret Service. Your hate-mongering may incite people to commit violence against an innocent woman. You ought to be ashamed.
P.S. Do you honestly believe the NYT would help terrorists attack NYC again?! What do you use for a brain.
Searching for the NEXT "terriorist" culprit...?
Get thee behind me Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men (Matt xvi, 23).
Reb YHSHWH, Jesus, is an incarnation of Jacob, Israel. He came not to save humanity, but to save Cosmic Consciousness from humans. Mosaic law was the necessary container for the revelation, which had to be expressed in symbolic, mythological terms because scientific language was not available (the human psyche was still too immature). KEY:::The revelation is not in the past, but now, for it is outside of time. Jesus did not die for our sins, he came to harvest the souls who are capable of breaking through their conditioning and living in the fire of His revelation. GET THIS:::The dawn of the third day is the dawn of the third millennium and the second coming is now.
Only when the psyche becomes cognizant of its structured elements can it die to the perception of itself as continuity. It can then free itself from that which appeared as being "contained" in its sphere of consciounsness, but was in fact its "container." It can open itself to the unutterable reality of Aleph. Then, the marvellous pulsation of life-death can permeate it and the individual is called upon to partake of the universal life.
From Glenn Greenwald:
"On June 8, 2003, the same New York Times published a lengthy article entitled "The Ex-President Next Store," which provided every possible detail one would ever want to know, and then many more beyond that, about Bill and Hillary Clinton's new home in Chappaqua, New York and the lives they lead there. The article contained numerous photographs of their home, and all sorts of information about where they eat, recreate and jog."
Why did this go without accusations that this was a terrorist plot to kill the Clintons?
It's time to stop the insanity.
Wow. What an incredible idiot you are! Congratulations. It takes a great deal of ignorance to sink to the level of stupidity you are showing here.
What else should we expect when simple bumpkins try to "be someone" or "create a stir" on the web? Just childish acts like this one, akin to a 2nd grader running around the playground yelling "I'm tel-ling! I'm tel-ling!"
Al Qaeda attacks again and thousands die. It's determined that central to their successful plan was the NY Times's neutering of the SWIFT program, FISA program and others? Could (and should) all of the victims' families sue the NY Times into oblivion?
Should current 911 victims' families be able to sue Jimmy Carter, (the man responsible for blowing the Iran hostage crisis)? After all, Carter's ineptitude marks the practical start of modern-day Islam's war with the West. Can they (or should they) sue Clinton, who had multiple opportunities to kill Bin Laden and refused to do it? Would 'administrating while engaged in fellatio' in the Oval Office be ample grounds for the dismissal of such a suit against Clinton? Or would that be a 'mitigating factor' in determining the amount of damages Bill would have to pay?
Thank you so much for your service to this country. We must crush the reporter swine. Who do they think they are publishing "news" about "public figures"? What does this country stand for, if not suppression of free speech? Sieg Heil!
Rocco - and I hope you don't mind if I address you by your name and like a fellow human being - you are not a nice man, and thinking is not your strong suit. Moreover, your lack of empathy for others is only exceeded by your inablity to grasp the obvious, c.f. a program Mr. Bush talks about one day is not a secret the next, and can't be revealed as news once it's already public knowledge.
Rocco, please try the decaf.
Repeating this for the intellectually challenged, such as Rocco:
Cheney's and Rumsfeld's homes are public knowledge. [In fact, Rumsfeld's house, called Mount Misery, was once the place where Frederick Douglass was beaten by his slave owner.] Both houses have been written about quite a bit. As has the fact that Bush lives in the White House, has a ranch in Crawford and vacations at Camp David. Your own Newsmax wrote about Rumsfeld's and Cheney's houses in 2005, here are the links for the google impaired:
Newsmax: http://www.newsmax.com/archives/.../5/
171908.shtml
International Herald Tribune: http://www.iht.com/articles/2005...news/
letter.php
Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/
wp...5090401391.html
Boston Globe http://www.boston.com/news/globe...es_dick_cheney/
Luxury Explorer http://www.luxuryexplorer.com/To...Archive?
trip=52
Salon, requires subscription http://www.salon.com/politics/wa...5/09/16/cheney/
General Aviation News http://www.generalaviationnews.c...column&-
nothing
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/...b/
s_372592.html
If you're going to go after the NYT for printing information that's public knowledge, don't you think you ought to go after Newsmax, Forbes, the International Herald Tribune, Washington Post, Boston Globe, Salon, General Aviation News and anyone else who writes about or photographs famous houses.
Give us time--we have to start somewhere, and the repetitive treachery of the New York Times in this time of war is a good place to start. Oh, by the way, when is the location of security cameras protecting high-ranking government officials considered "public knowledge"?
Just Askin:
Tie your own hands, and you guarantee your own defeat.
You scream about exposing Pinch, and say nothing about Cheney and Rumsfeld. Take your hypocrisy and put it where the sun doesn't shine.
And why are we stopping at Sulzberger? Why not research the security measures in place at the NY Slimes' offices?
Amen, brother Rocco!
FYI,
Glenn Greenwald, if he used to hangout in the TownHall forum on Compuserve, is computer bully. In person, he is a weenie. We have met.
When you read this story about the NYT printing details on Cheney and Rumsfeld's vacation houses, it's interesting to keep in mind what they printed a year and a half ago where they "wished for an 'act of God' to remove President Bush." (Charles' words at LGF)
Here's what Charles wrote about the incident:
What the hell is going on at the New York Times?
I expect the bias. I expect Paul Krugman’s distorted op-eds, and Maureen Dowd’s incoherent babbling. I expect the pro-Palestinian, anti-American articles that flow from the Old Grey Lady in a constant stream.
What I don’t expect to find is a thinly veiled cry for an “act of God” to remove President Bush from office—in an article that describes previous assassinations of US presidents as “acts of God.”
According to Dean E. Murphy, God sometimes steps in when Democrats have lost elections—by causing assassins to kill Republican presidents.
So, after the NYT has now disclosed the NSA wiretapping program and the SWIFT banking program, and drawn sharp criticism from the right and a censure from Congress, how could anyone not see their printing this info about Cheney and Rumsfeld's houses as a subtle invitation to, in a deniable hands-off manner, further the odds that an "act of God" might remove Cheney or Rumsfeld in the same way that they mused wistfully about one taking care of Bush?
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/
..._to_Remove_Bush
Horowitz thinks there is a war on?
I'm laughing my butt off.
If that keyboarder REALLY thought there was any kind of a danger he'd be running over the crippled and injured to get to the exit!
If there is a war the Democrats are taking it in the gut, and losing badly.
To paraphrase a bad movie 'A war? You don't wanna war 'cause you can't handle a war'
NYT publisher, photographers, reporters and writers' addresses should not be given out. One has to be concerned that some misguided US troopers from Afghanistan/Iraq might locate, confront and personally beat the shit out of the NYTimers and thereby get into trouble with the law. These troops should just understand and accept as just that the Timers love their prizes and awards for illegally publishing troop endangering classified information more than they care about the life of any hick, red state trooper. Anyway, with a local selective service draft, Manhattan will have plenty of their own ltroops to retaliate and to intimidate terrorist backing states that might attack the Big Apple. These poor rednecks are just creating more enemies anyway, so the hicks should stand down unless there's an attack against red-state territory. The New York Times will itself handle any tiny bit of trouble that the Big Apple might have in the future after terrorists understand from reading the Times that they have friends in New York who have always been against actually using troops in the war against terrorism.
What happened to the Linda Spillers post?
Give em hell Rocco. I posted a link to your site on my web page, and the wackos are screaming like stuck pigs.
Apparently what youi want to do is a crime against humanity, but what the NY Times did is "freedom of the press."
Amazing how things are always a one-way street with the Left.
What the NYT might have done by showing the location of the security cameras is commit the crime of reckless endangerment, which can be a felony, depending on the state and the circumstances. This is something for state law enforcement and the Justice Dept to investigate and determine. Committing the same crime against the NYT just because the NYT did it is not worth it, and those who are doing it or considering it would be better off using their considerable investigative talents to keep exposing the NYT's lies and treason.
What part of freedom do you wingnuts not get?
Second, Bush is the one who disclosed the tracking of Al Qaeda banking records on 9/20/01!!
Third, the SWIFT Program has been in the public domain for years.
They have a website with an FAQ describing what they do.
Freedom of Speech, Freedom of the Press, and the Right to Vote...These are concepts wingnuts apparently just cannot grasp.
Geeze. I hope everyone enjoys venting and not saying too much. At the risk of elevating Rocco's argument by engaging with it, this whole issue decomposes into three points. When you put them side by side, it's hard to make any kind of case for publishing the Times' folks' information in retaliation.
(1)Rumsfeld and Cheney are public officials, protected by security forces, and the location of their homes is easily googled. I don't think anyone denies that. Moreover, this is not the first public official so "outed." To boot, it's highly unlikely that the articles that ran in the Times were not vetted by security forces beforehand.
(2)The people who work for the Times are not public citizens. They are private people who do a job that they're given (yes, even the editors) and consequently are not afforded the same protections as public officals are when "off duty." Consequently, publishing their information is not the same thing as publishing the information of public officials.
(3)Yes, it's true that almost everyone has private information online if you look hard enough. Some of us are better than others at staying anonymous, but it seems like a chimera to argue that the Times' photographer's information was already google-able and hence publicizing it in Rocco's context made no difference. What Rocco did--and what he's doing with the editors--is recontextualizing information in a way that changes who knows about it and in what context. So again, this is not the same thing as they are claiming.
I personally think the whole idea of publishing people's private information on line, in this context, is despicable. Masculine pissing contest aside, Rocco, how would you like the same done to you in the opposite context?
What's most interesting, of course, about this whole Times "contraversy" is that it indicates that the right-wing punditry is rapidly running out of mainstream things to chamion and complain about. In simple point of fact: the government has been caught spying on ordinary people, not just terrorists (or at least has established a system by which there's no oversight on the issue, which amounts to the same thing), so "everyone look this way: the Times just published Dick Cheney's daily vacation routine!"
(Finally, Art, I'm really sick of the chimera that people on the left look down on US Troops serving abroad. Please don't insinuate that unless you wish us to take the statements of a few on the right as representative of the whole--trust us, you don't want us to. Attacking us as "anti-troops" is a cheap shot, tired, and unimaginative. Figure out something to say before saying it, please.)
You folks truly are insane. I can't wait until the FBI locks the lot of you up for a long long time.
Bush doesn't have a ranch, it's a villa. The man can't ride a bike, let alone a freakin' horse (Laura excepted of course).
i have it on very reliable sources that many of these left-leaning pinko journalists gather at 1600 pennsyvania ave in washington.
Rocco,
Your actions inciting harassment, stalking, and possible violence against reporters and editors doing their jobs, as both mandated and protected by the United States Constitution, have been reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and to Blogger.
Good day, psycho.
Constituion Lover said "Your actions inciting harassment, stalking, and possible violence against reporters and editors doing their jobs, as both mandated and protected by the United States Constitution, have been reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation and to Blogger."
I'm shaking, idiot.
"Constitution lover:"
Would that be the same FBI who refused to arrest or even investigate the 911 terrorists before they flew into the WTC, or the one you saw on the X-Files?
No doubt you reported the article printed by the New York Times, as well.
I suggest you have someone read the Constitution to you and explain it in very simple terms.
I'll tell you what it doesn't say: "New York Times prints private information to incite violence--GOOD. Autonomist prints public information to expose the left's hypocrisy--BAD."
Spread the word.
ahhhhhhhh - the smell of the left!
Further proof that all right wingnuts are psychotic and should be put in the state mental hospital. You Chimpyloving NAZIs won't be happy until the Constitution is destroyed.
Tom3,
Please don't run with the ahistorical "Democrats protect the Constitution" line. It makes you look like an ass.
The Democratic Party was founded by strident Anti-Federalists, those who were opposed to the ratification of the US Constitution. One of the first acts of the first Democrat President in US history, Andrew Jackson, was to undermine a Supreme Court ruling in favor of Cherokee sovereignty to begin the Trail of Tears ethnic cleansing. Jackson also created the "spoils system," a cronyist political appointment regime fully designed to negate democratic accountability. Not too much later, the federal ban on African slave importation and interstate trade inspired Democrats to fire upon US military installations when a religious right-wing abolition movement swept Abraham Lincoln into the White House, beginning a civil war. At the end of that civil war, the Democratic Party formed a militant wing, the Ku Klux Klan, to violate the civil rights of newly freed black people and their white supporters. After the Civil Rights Act of 1868 barely passed the Congress over Democrat objections, President Grant used it to fight Democrat KKK terrorism. Not long after that, the Ku Klux Klan enjoyed a resurgence under Klansman Woodrow Wilson, who used Jackson's spoils system to insure that there was no need to call the police on a KKK attack, because the Democrat cops were already there, dressed to kill blacks under their personal hoods and sheets. It was also around this time that Wilson decided that violating the privacy of American citizens was fun, which brought on the Palmer Raids. Not long after that, national socialist President Franklin Roosevelt put American citizens in internment camps based on their race, during a war with Japanese imperialists and a German dictator Roosevelt had spent the previous eight years investing heavily in arming up to world power status while conservatives in Britain sounded the alarm. That war ended with Democrat Klansman Harry Truman dropping atomic weapons of mass destruction on Japanese civilians well after Japan had lost its capability to export warfare off of its home islands. This set the tone for all Democrat leadership in combat actions that followed - Korea, Vietnam, Serbia - high altitude bombing upon civilian infrastructure for no discernable tactical reasons (President Johnson's famous penis-waving aside). When faced with dealing with a Rwanda genocide, an Iraqi defiance of UN inspections, and a Serbian crackdown on Al Qaeda-backed Albanian KLA terrorists, President Clinton chose to provide air support without Constitutional authority to Al Qaeda, led by international terrorist Osama Bin Laden, a man for whom Clinton refused extradition offers from the Sudan and Saudi Arabia (although Clinton's counter-terrorism efforts under Richard Clarke did put a stop to Al Qaeda downloading Metallica songs from Napster for free).
Please don't try to sell the lie that Democrats give a damn about the Constitution. They don't even care about human rights.
Why dont you all learn little more about how terrorists think instead. I watched a really good documentury on BBC last night (yeah, public service IS the best source for unbiased information) and its just amazes me how really far from reality you are. There is NO terrorist in the world that would EVER go after them. NEVER. Terrorist wants to strike fear into the heart of the people. New York is the no1 target for terrorist because it represent USA far better than any other city in USA. Bush and the Republicans has now left them almost defenceless. Now THAT is what traitors do.
Way to go, Rocco! It's nice to see that the trail blazed by Julius Streicher, that spiritual forefather of Free Republic and other mighty online brownshirts, has not been forgotten. After all, Streicher used to do the same thing in his "Pillory Column" in Der Sturmer, that is, he'd invite his readers to contribute information about private citizens in Germany who were, shall we say, less than enthusiastic about the war against the Jews.
Not that the man advocated VIOLENCE against the people who were featured in the Pillory Column! Oh mercy no! Streicher just.. well.. wanted the information out there about who qualified as a mindless traitor to all that was just and right and Aryan. His readers would know what to do. Maybe some hatemail... A few muttered threats... vandalism... The slaying of a beloved family pet... Little stuff like that.
Some traditions never die.
Pamela, the constant attempt by leftwingers like you to associate the Right with Naziism is tired and disingenuous, especially since it is the Left that exhibits a closer affinity to totalitarian methods.
Your side tries destroying people and their opinions by labeling them as 'racist,' when they are not, 'homophobic,' when they are not, 'xenophobic,' when they are not.And on and on and on. Your ideas and agendas are mostly proven failures, so you resort to name calling and falsely associating your philosophical opponents with mass murderers and the like.
In the hope of destroying its ideological and political opponents,the modern Left makes outrageous statements and repeats them ad nauseum, to sow deception and to spread disinformation. Here are two examples:
1)The Left's campaign equating the Bush Administration's policies with those of Adolf Hitler
2)Its relentless proffering of crackpot theories and rumours,which imply or outright state that '9/11 was an inside job.'
Let us also not forget a simple fact: During the 2004 Republican Convention in NY, bands of leftist thugs targeted and attacked convention delegates. I was there.
I watched the anti-Bush protests and was appalled at the level of seething hatred displayed by the protesters. I walked the gauntlet of hate-filled leftwingers who pressed up against the barricades that had been set up to guide delegates out of Madison Square Garden.And in their crazed faces and while dodging their spittle I came to realize that they were ready to kill, if only given the chance or the order.
I am a very street-savvy guy. I know that look when I see it.
During my Convention experience, I saw the modern-day versions of the Brownshirts, of Mao's revolutionaries and of Pol Pot's henchman--people, seething with such hatred that I am still convinced that it is only a matter of time and frustration before they act out in a logical extension of that hatred. What I saw were packs of people with sick souls using politics to exorcise their personal demons--actual politics was not the prime motivator of their behaviors. Theirs was a twisted mob mentality.
That, in my opinion, is the face of today's far-Left.
It's interesting to note that there was no equivalent dynamic in effect during the 2004 Democratic Convention in Boston: Roving gangs of rightwingers did not materialize, nor did seething, rage filled protests against Democrats and leftwingers occur.
No, Pamela-- today, the Left -- and not the Right -- is far more likely to mimic the Brownshirts in both words and deeds.
One of the central tenets of my political thinking is that history can not be rewritten.
Simply put, Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were leftists, influenced by the leftist writings of ex-communist Benito Mussolini. There was nothing right-wing about the Nazis, and today's modern leftists want the same things Hitler campaigned for when he was elected.
Pamela would have been better off typing "I am a blithering idiot," which is a synonym for the "Nazis were right-wingers" meme.
Abso-freaking-lutely Mr. B.
In fact, Fascism-Nazism-FDRism was Communism with the degree of twist necessary to be palatable based on the size of a nations middle class.
Even a historical tyro knows this to be true!
Rightminded,
The lie stems from the simplistic assessment that because FDR was a leftist and the Soviet Union was leftist, that Hitler and the Nazis must have be right-wing.
But this assessment ignores history. The Nazis and Soviets were ALLIED until June 1941. From 1932 to 1940, the FDR administration invested heavily in the German economy. The only right-wingers in the picture were Winston Churchill and other British conservatives, and they were very much anti-Nazi AND anti-Communist.
Infantile is the idea that leftists can't turn their guns on each other. In fact, history shows more often than not that leftist powers and factions fight each other the most!
Stalin and Trotsky?
First Europa NL
site link: http://www.firsteuropa.nl
Uw online verzekeringsmakelaarEerst Europa Doelstellingen: De Ci2i Verzekering (Ci2i) zal
het nummer een gebrandmerkte pan Europese commoditized online verzekeringsmakelaar door 2010 zijn.
http://www.firsteuropa.nl Uw online verzekeringsmakelaar Eerst Europa Doelstellingen: De Ci2i Verzekering (Ci2i) zal het nummer een
gebrandmerkte pan Europese commoditized online verzekeringsmakelaar door 2010 zijn.
These comments have been invaluable to me as is this whole site. I thank you for your comment.
Commenting by HaloScan
