Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
You know what struck me over the weekend, ladies and gentlemen, is how the big media, the drive-by media, never, ever get investigated.
They do not investigate themselves.
CBS did over rather, but they had to on that one.
But they never ever get investigated.
They can distort, they can lie, they can ruin people, they can create total false impressions of reality that has real effect on people's lives, and nobody ever demands an investigation.
But let it be big oil that does something, or let it be big drug that does something, or big retail or big tobacco.
Well, we'll stop the presses and we'll investigate.
I know the media has First Amendment protections, and I'm not suggesting Congress should do this.
I'm just saying in terms of the institutions that guide our lives and shape our thinking, the one that perhaps has more importance and more power than any of these others never, ever gets called to task, never ever is investigated while they seek to investigate and destroy everybody else that gets in their way or of their agenda.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome.
Rush Limbaugh back.
Full week.
Well, no, not a full week of broadcast excellence.
Sorry, three days.
Then off to Hawaii on Thursday for a golf gig.
What?
What?
How can I?
I'm going to Hawaii.
Well, I got some friends out there.
A guy just built a new house.
I'm going to go out there.
I've been going out there for two years.
I've been putting this off for two years.
And finally going to go out there and it's the only time I've got.
It's going to get swamp heavy here getting the election season and so forth.
At any rate, greetings, folks.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
We'll get to this latest resolution attempt by the White House and I guess the French and the United Nations to cease hostilities in Lebanon and Israel.
This attempt, I'm going to tell you up front, makes me sick to my stomach.
I hope it fails.
I think it's ridiculous.
And I wish somebody just get out of the way and let the Israelis one time finish the job.
What nobody wants to admit here is that this is all about Iran and Syria.
And if we don't deal with this now, we're going to have to deal with it at some point.
Mark my words, because there's no such thing as a sustainable peace, especially a sustainable peace that is established on the Lebanese establishing a full-fledged government that's going to have total control over the Hezbos.
If one thing we know is impossible, it's that.
This prime minister doesn't even want that.
He's scared to death of the Hezbos.
And this guy, Sheikh Nasrallah, has become a rock star in the Arab world.
He supplanted Osama bin Laden.
In fact, the Lebanese prime minister has essentially said that this proposed resolution, the first of two that was announced today by the president and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is no good because it allows Israeli forces to stay in southern Lebanon.
Of course it's no good.
That's not going to work in terms of a ceasefire.
His international force and so forth.
And it just frustrates me.
More on that in just a second.
The beginning, the opening of the program here about the media never being investigated, I'm sure many of you by now have heard of the literal fraud perpetrated by all Reuters with all of the fake and doctored photos coming out of the action in Lebanon.
It's much too numerous to recount verbally here.
We have posted at rushlimbaugh.com.
Was up till three in the morning on Sunday working on this when I first heard about this and trying to organize all that's out there in the blogosphere.
Little Green Footballs was the first to call attention to this.
Charles Johnson, who runs that blog, has had his life threatened now by a Reuters.
Well, we think it's a Reuters employee.
Somebody has used a Reuters email address to send him a death threat, essentially saying he can't wait.
The Reuters can't wait to see Charles Johnson's throat slit.
It all started with a bunch of fake photos about bombing attacks in Beirut.
Photoshop has a clone tool.
If you use Photoshop, you're familiar with this.
And you can clone various any aspect of a photo that you want.
And they did it with the smoke, and it was just horribly done.
It was so obviously hurried.
It was not even professional.
And even a professional attempt to doctor the pictures couldn't stand up to the light of day.
Reuters took a while before they retracted the picture, but it's already out there.
It had already been on front pages of newspapers, just like these phony baloney plastic banana pictures that have come out of Kana.
We now know that much of these are staged.
There are two other questionable pictures.
They're actually more than that.
This is tip of the iceberg, folks.
Dan Rather was just the tip of the iceberg.
This stuff going on here is confirming every suspicion I've had about fake news oriented toward the action line per story that drive-by media types have.
Anything outside that doesn't permeate, doesn't register, and they're not interested in it.
And in fact, they'll go so even make things up and enhance things and make it look worse than it was to advance their storyline.
Reuters ought to be disgraced forever over this.
They ought to be investigated.
They ought to investigate themselves.
Haven't heard any call for this.
And that's what made me realize this outfit, this bunch, this industry, as destructive as it can be, both to individuals, to corporations, and to cultures and societies, never ever gets investigated, nor do the individuals in it ever get investigated.
Now, the second picture, and this was a doozy, the second picture purported to show an Israeli F-16.
Although the F-16 was not in the picture frame, it was cropped out.
What it showed was three or four missiles being launched, obviously on innocent civilian targets.
The caption is as important as the picture.
It turns out that the real picture was of an Israeli F-16 firing off one flare, as in chaff, to try to confuse surface-to-air missiles if the Hezbollahs have any and if they were going to launch any.
You take the picture, you duplicate or clone the flare and its streak of smoke through the sky, which was being emitted from behind the F-16 when you see the real picture.
The cropped version made it look like these are missiles that had been fired.
There were four of them.
The other thing that has just been discovered, and I'm sure for that, countless more, there have to be countless more, not just with Reuters.
This guy, Reuters has finally said, we're not going to use this freelancer anymore.
Naji Haji, I'll shake whatever his name is.
I couldn't care less.
And they've pulled his entire portfolio from their website.
But there's another picture showed from about a week apart.
First picture is a wide-angle view of a destroyed building somewhere in Lebanon.
And I think that's on July 24th or something, 28th.
On August 4th, the same picture, well, a picture at the same place, close-up, showing one of the same buildings with a forlorn woman walking through the rubble was sent out on the wire again as evidence of a second bombing.
It was the same place, the same destruction, with different angles, different fields of view from the viewfinder.
And it's all been portrayed as two separate attacks.
In the first instance, where the smoke was cloned to make it look as though the whole city was on fire, they even cloned buildings.
They cloned damaged buildings.
I mean, it's clear what the intent here is.
The intent is to lie to the American people.
They know that they're willing accomplices in the drive-by media internationally are not going to investigate, are not going to be curious.
Reuters wasn't even curious.
These obvious fakes got past their professional editors, their photojournalist editors.
They didn't get past anything.
They tried to sneak a bunch of fraudulent photos past other media, which would not be hard because they're all on the same page.
And of course, consumers who read this.
Once again, as in the Dan Rather situation, it was the blogosphere that brought this to light to everybody's attention, started by little green footballs, and their website got clogged, and other websites picked it up.
What we have, if you're new to this or if you haven't seen as much of the detail as there is to see and as much of the analysis, because I mean, it is devastating, folks.
The photo analysis that photojournalist experts have engaged in here.
We have quite a few examples on the website now at rushlimbaugh.com.
We put them up yesterday.
So I think this is just tip of the iceberg.
I don't think it's just limited to Al Reuters.
I can't help but go back when I first leveled the claim here about the phony staged photos in Khanna, how the executive vice president, Carol was her last name.
I can't remember her first name, made the remark, How can people in an air-conditioned studio like me or in a cubicle with a computer some 6,000 miles away possibly understand what's going on?
They don't understand the competitive nature of what we do in this business.
There's no competitive nature because what we have found is that in the case of Khanna, the media is herded into a waiting area.
They're all there.
There's no competitive anything.
And then there are two guys been named white t-shirt and green helmet.
And these guys are always on the scene at virtually every disaster in Lebanon.
And they parade these corpses before the media gaggle on a certain occasion.
Then four hours later, before a certain backdrop, so the same pictures go out with different time stamps on them.
There's no competition.
They're just sitting ducks.
They're just herding.
They're waiting like they do every day.
You think they go out and report news?
Hell, they wait for the fax machine.
They wait for press releases, talking points from their buddies.
And then that stirs them.
You wonder how every news media person in this country ended up calling Cheney gravitas after he was nominated to be VP.
We've got that montage.
I don't want to play it for you, but over 35 media people over the course of a week referring to that choice as having gravitas because Bush was a lightweight.
So, I mean, this is a really serious thing as far as I'm concerned, because, you know, it's sort of like I've always told you with law enforcement, there just is a natural tendency on the part of citizens.
Forget politics here.
There's a natural tendency on the part of citizens to believe law enforcement.
Law enforcement is the good guys.
They're always the guys in white hats, and they're always going out grabbing the bad guys.
And when they say somebody did something, the human nature tendency is to believe it.
Big media benefits from the same thing.
It's just been, they're there, they're on the scene, they're trying to get the facts.
And plus, when they show you pictures, pictures are what move in many cases.
And in this case, Al Reuters is being done in by the pictures.
But this is, I think, on purpose, especially by Al Reuters, for the express purpose of harming and destroying the Israelis' effort to win this war.
They have clearly chosen sides, and it is with the Hesbos.
Much of what I call the drive-by media has done the same thing.
Now, you may be hearing about this for the first time.
I don't know how engaged you were over the weekend and how much you have been made aware of this, but if this is the first you're hearing of it, there's a reason.
Nobody in the drive-by media in this country is the least interested in this.
Nobody.
Just like they were not interested in Rather for a while, what happened after the Rather exposure was that the drive-by media started denigrating the blogosphere, calling them the pajama media, a bunch of lazy guys who don't go report.
No editors.
Well, there are no editors at Al Reuters either.
And if there are editors at Al Reuters, they're worthless skunks.
They have no excuse on this.
They're withdrawing the portfolio, withdrawing the pictures and so forth.
And that seems to satisfy.
Oh, we made a mistake.
Okay, Reuters has corrected it.
There's no curiosity.
The rest of the media, but, well, wait a minute.
If they're doctoring photos, could they be doctoring captions and making them up?
If they're doctoring photos, maybe did what we learned that came out of Kanna actually not happen?
No curiosity.
No desire to go revisit it.
That's the drive-by media.
You drive by, you throw words and images into the crowd, totally distort, totally shake things up.
You get everybody all roiled up, then you drive down the road to the next event and do the same thing.
It's going to be interesting to see if anybody in the mainstream drive-by media in this country has any outrage over this in terms of at least wondering if that kind of thing will boomerang or bleed into their own reputations.
You know, they hang the, I bet Reuters, this photo guy will end up having the wagon circled around him.
He'll be given a Pulitzer Prize by somebody.
He may be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for all I know, because the trend is for all these people in the drive-by media to circle the wagons when one of them is under assault, even when so blatantly, obviously guilty that it ought to be embarrassing.
And it ought to cause an investigation.
It ought to make these people worry about their own credibility industry-wide.
But nothing.
Back in just a second.
Hi, welcome back, folks.
El Rushball, America's real anchorman serving humanity behind the Golden EIB microphone.
Yeah, I tell you, you know, this business of doctored photos and forged documents, courtesy of Dan Blanther.
I'm sure you can think of countless.
We've got to get people on the phones thinking of countless other examples.
It's only going to get worse for these people if they don't wise up here and understand that there are now members of an alternative media that are scrutinizing everything they do, and their credibility is waning.
I mean, ABC has a story again today.
This is something we reported on just a couple weeks ago, if not even that long ago.
Half of U.S. still believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.
It's on the ABC News website, but it's an Associated Press story by Charles J. Hanley, AP, special correspondent.
Did Saddam Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction in 2003?
Half of America apparently still thinks so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why.
A draft and drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people in their own minds to justify the war in Iraq.
How about the possibility that they are there or were there?
Everybody knows they were there, and Clinton and Kerry and everybody, the Democratic Party in 1998 warned us of the same thing.
But Mr. Henley of AP says people tend to become independent of reality in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Stephen Cole.
Note here, the media just beside itself, half of us, still believe that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and they blame us for being stupid.
We're the ones who cling to alternative realities.
It's inverted.
It's just the exact opposite.
It is they who have no curiosity.
It is they who operate on the premise now.
There were never any weapons of mass destruction.
History on this didn't begin until George Bush began talking about it.
What Bill Clinton said in 1998, what the drive-by media wrote about weapons of mass destruction in 1998, 99, and 2000, which we have documented and found and put on our website, never happened, apparently.
History began when Bush first started talking about this.
So now, of course, you people, mind-numbed robots, incapable of self-thought, incapable of your own research, you're being hoodwinked again by people like me and the bloggers and, of course, the deceit-ridden oval office.
I love this.
People tend to become independent of reality in these circumstances.
It's not that people think they're still there.
It's that people knew they were there.
They had been used.
By the way, do you know, ladies and gentlemen, that it has been discovered that Iran, with an N, is now in the midst of attempting to seek yellow cake from Africa to upgrade their...
Do you know that?
Now, how long is it going to be before Joe Wilson gets sent over there by somebody to write a report saying it's BS?
And how long is that history going to take to repeat itself?
Iran's now trying.
Well, if Iran was, how come Iraq couldn't have been?
We know Hussein was, every one of these clowns wants nuclear weapons.
That's the problem here.
Everybody knows that's what Iran is all about.
And letting these ragtags like the Hezbollahs get them eventually.
And that's going to have to be dealt with at some point.
You can't just keep having these ceasefires every 21 days when hostilities break out and call it a sustaining peace because we're going to build up a government.
The president said today, it's important here to base a future stability in the region on legitimate governments rather than temporary security.
Well, great, but what evidence is there that the Lebanese have the slightest ability to resist Iran or the Syrians or now even Hezbollah?
I wish them the best in this.
I really do.
But the Israelis, I think, are continuing to pound and they're increasing their ground offensive, which is good.
We'll be back here in just a second.
Thank you.
On the cutting edge of societal evolution, Rushlin bought talent on loan from God.
Another question occurred to me last night as I started hearing inklings about this new draft ceasefire proposal between the French and the United States to be presented later this week at the United Nations Security Council.
Why hasn't the world demanded a ceasefire in Iraq?
No, no, seriously.
If we've got to cease hostilities, if we've got to stop the suffering, and if we have to bring peace to the region, why has nobody demanded a ceasefire?
Forget the American left.
I'm not talking about them.
The American left is predictable and they're going to do what they do regardless.
I'm talking about the international community.
I'm talking about the same bunch of voices that are crying and screaming for a ceasefire in that in Lebanon.
I want to repeat to you again.
The reason that they are not calling for a ceasefire in Iraq is precisely because the world wants us to get our ass kicked.
The world wants us to be beaten out of there, folks.
And they like the opportunity to drive-by media to tell the story that that's exactly what's happening.
They love the opportunity to tell the story of how American Marines are killing and wanting innocents.
24 Iraqis are raping Iraqi women and girls.
They love the opportunity.
They love the opportunity to sit there and say, how we're losing.
We're being kicked out that Bush doesn't have enough troops.
They love us being there because it energizes the anti-war left in this country and around the world.
So there's no need for a ceasefire because they think they can portray an image of the U.S. losing.
And if you look at the polls and if you look at the drive-by media, watch their programs and read their papers and magazines, do you not find yourself in a palpable funk over the fact that we're losing in Iraq?
So of course nobody's going to call for a ceasefire there because it looks like we are losing.
Got to have a ceasefire though in southern Lebanon between the Israelis and the Hezbos.
Why is that?
Well, Hezbos must be getting their butts kicked.
Like I told you last week, if it was the Israelis that were losing big, there wouldn't be any calls for a ceasefire here.
And now we're saying we've got to have the security border.
We've got to have an international force in there on the border between Lebanon and Israel to preserve the peace while the Lebanese government establishes itself as sovereign with total control over the Hezbollahs.
Hello, UN Resolution 1559.
That one's already failed.
So because that one failed, we're going to try again.
We're going to keep repeating the same mistakes over and over again.
Only this time we're going to use different language.
We're going to have an international force in there made up of people who hate the Israelis as well, because everybody does.
I wasn't fully aware until this weekend just how much virulent anti-Semitism there is in the world.
I wasn't aware of it.
I mean, I know it's there, but I didn't realize how strong and how widespread and how motivated and energized at this moment in history it is.
You put an international force in there, and this is supposed to stop the violence, and it's supposed to cause a cooling off period.
It's supposed to lead to a sustainable peace.
Now, I will wait for somebody to explain this to me in great detail.
I'm going to try to make that happen because the way I understand it now doesn't make sense to me.
And I want to talk to somebody who knows, who has a role in this, that can explain this to me right now that hasn't, I haven't a chance to make that happen, but I will before this broadcast ends on Wednesday.
Now, about security forces, security borders.
Didn't we have one of those with Iraq?
Didn't we have things called no-fly zones?
We had no fly zones, right?
And this was to constrain Saddam and to make sure that he didn't fly north or south of these zones and hurt the Kurds or do anything in the southern part of the country, but didn't stop him from fraudulently exercising the oil for food program, did it?
And it didn't stop him from attempting to acquire weapons of mass destruction, did it?
Why don't these things work so well, let's put up a security boundary or one of these security borders here with international troops between Iraq and Iran.
And let's put one up between Iraq and Syria.
And let's put one up between Iraq and Jordan.
Let's duplicate what we're doing in Israel and Lebanon and Iraq.
Let's call for a ceasefire.
Let's stop the suffering.
Let's stop the killing.
The world can't stand this.
And let's do these border security ideas and let's see if it works.
If this is the roadmap to peace, then by God, well, move it.
Hubba-hubba.
Let's get going.
Why not internationally control buffer zones between Iraq and Iran and Syria?
I mean, to take my point further, we had these two buffer zones controlled by our Air Force in Iraq.
The liberals said, see, Iraq is contained.
We don't need to do anymore.
But that wasn't good enough.
We said it wasn't good enough.
I said it wasn't good enough because Iraq was acquiring or trying to acquire weapons of mass destruction.
It was a threat to its neighbors, abusing its people.
The oil for food program was going on while all of these no-fly zones were being enforced.
What nobody wants to deal with here, ladies and gentlemen, even though they know it, they just don't want to deal with it right now, is that the Hezbollahs are Iran.
Hezbollah is Iran.
Iran seeks nukes.
Iran is attacking Israel.
They're first.
We are second.
Israel is trying to weaken, if not destroy, Hezbollah's ability to attack their country.
I know of no instance around the world where a sovereign country is attacked and it's put on the clock and said, you've got X number of days to deal with this, or the UN and the international community are going to come in and take over.
So it appears what we're trying to do here is recreate in southern Lebanon what had existed in Iraq prior to our going to war there.
So with these no-fly zones.
So the point to me is: why is it okay for us to try to destroy the terrorist threat in Iraq?
Nobody tells us we shouldn't be doing that.
Well, the American left does, but I've already exempted them from any intelligent discussion of this.
Why is it okay for us to destroy the terrorist threat in Iraq?
Why does nobody call for a ceasefire?
What does nobody say we can't continue this, the killing, the suffering?
But Israel has to accept a phony containment that won't provide it or the world with any security.
Nobody has the will to take out Iran and Syria right now.
They're both at the root of the problem at Iraq and Lebanon.
And if Iran gets nukes, it's going to have more firepower than the Nazis did when it comes to the ability to mount a single attack.
Now, let me ask you something else.
I'm an American citizen and I'm in the media.
And I just told you what I think.
Do you ever hear, have you, when you listen to television, Sunday shows, nighttime cable, whatever, how often from big media do you hear a discussion along the lines of that which we just had here?
You don't.
And this is what I mean by their narrow focus, their narrow action line, narrow storyline, the prism and the lens through which they gaze to report all of this news.
My thought process here, and I'm not, you know, I could be wrong, but the point is, it never make it.
These discussions never make it to the so-called drive-by media.
They run with a story.
They repeat the same things.
They run lying, stinking, fraudulent pictures.
They fall for staged photo-op pictures by the enemy, and yet, and then they go get so-called experts or journalists to repeat what they already think to reinforce their own expertise in the drive-by media.
You don't get any independent thinking or context or even any real analysis of this in the drive-by media.
So anyway, let me grab a couple phone calls here before we have to go to the next break.
Joe, in Sparta, New Jersey, I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the program, sir.
How are you doing, Rush?
Second time.
Fine, thank you.
I was looking at Little Greens Football about the articles, and in the comments, there's a link to an 18-minute documentary about the Palestinians.
They show footage from an unmanned Israeli drone of a funeral of one of the martyrs.
Well, before they get to the crowd, they, by mistake, drop the litter and the body, supposed body rolls off.
Well, the martyr gets back up and gets back on the litter by himself and then gets covered with the flag on they go to the crowd for the cameras.
So it's a fake corpse.
It's a fake corpse.
It wasn't a corpse.
It was a live body acting like a corpse, but he fell off the stretcher or the litter, whatever, and had to get back up real quick.
And they have the footage from an unmanned drone.
He gets back up and they cover the body up with the flag again and go onto their to the photo op.
But it's a very informative documentary.
It's called Pollywood, and it's off one of the links.
Oh, yes, I've heard about this.
Pallywood.
Yeah, in fact, the same term has been used in a different form to the attached to Hezbollah, Pali Bazoo or something like that.
I forget what it is, but it's all about the fact that they're staging, they're acting, creating events for cameras.
And of course, you know, here's another thing.
I'm not going to sit here and believe that people are this stupid, that these photojournalists are this stupid.
These are freelancers over there.
They live in Lebanon, that the Reuters people, like this one guy did, Haji Al-Sheikh Al-Mani, whatever his name is, I couldn't care less anymore.
But the bottom line is they get these freelancers and they hire them.
And you can't tell me that this guy made mistakes.
His mistake was carelessness and getting caught.
You can't tell me these people are innocent victims of their own hearts.
You can't tell me that they're trying to do the best that they can.
And you can't tell me that the competitive pressures, particularly in a war zone, are the primary culprits here.
I think it is totally reasonable to assume that all these people are actively engaged human beings and they're in a war zone.
Active, engaged human beings think, and active, engaged human beings have an interest in the outcome of events.
And it is clear through all these doctored, fake, fraudulent photos that people are attempting to present a false image and impression, hoping to condemn Israel in the PR sense in the spin phase of this to make their job even harder and to also stoke the world up in sensitivity and sympathy and in favor of the Hezbos.
There's no question of this being done on purpose.
It is these, oh my God, we're shocked when we can't believe that these pictures got by our vast professional editors.
It got past the editors because the editors passed them.
Just assume nobody would question it.
That's what I mean by the arrogance of these people.
Even after Dan Rather, even after all the other exposés, most of the people in the drive-by media still do not get the fact that they are being investigated on a daily basis by alternative media.
Back in just a second.
Matt Drudge just posted right before the program started today.
Drudge posted the following story from Reuters.
Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Sonoria or Sonora said on Monday that one person had been killed in an Israeli airstrike on the southern border village of Hula rather than 40 as earlier feared.
A resident said about 50 people have been found alive under the rubble.
The massacre, it turned out there was just one person killed.
The PM told reporters they thought the whole building smashed on the heads.
About 40 people, thank God they have been saved.
Yes, yes, thank God they've been saved.
Bottom line, ladies and gentlemen, is that correction never makes as much news as the original.
In fact, I just saw something about one of these fake pictures in a drive-by still can't get it right.
The Israeli F-16 was photographed out of the picture.
Well, it was in the picture.
They showed apparently four missiles being launched.
Four missiles from the F-16.
They were not missiles.
It was one flare.
It was chaff.
It's stuff jets released to confuse surface-to-air missiles.
And the one flare that was released, of course, with its blazing front end, was cloned into four different flares made to look like missiles.
But flares don't do any destruction, and they're still talking about the destruction of one missile.
There was no missile.
It was a flare launched backwards.
The jets streaking through this guy down to flares launched backwards to try to confuse any surface-to-air missile.
Not hard to understand if you have a rudimentary understanding of aviation and aircraft, particularly military aircraft.
Let me ask you if you've seen this story anywhere in the drive-by media.
There is a Wahhabi mullah or imam in Saudi Arabia, a cleric who was instrumental in inspiring Osama bin Laden, issued a fatwa demanding that Saudis oppose the devil in this context, the devil, Hezbollah.
Have you seen this reported?
Now, of course you haven't seen this reported.
A top Sunni cleric, Saudi Sunni cleric whose ideas inspired bin Laden issued a religious edict Saturday disavowing the Shiite guerrilla group Hezbollah, evidence that a rift remained among Muslims over the fighting in Lebanon.
Hezbollah, which translates as the party of God, is actually the party of the devil, said Sheikh Safar al-Hawali, whose radical views made the al-Qaeda leader one of his followers in the past.
Don't pray for Hezbollah, he said in the fatwa that was posted on his website.
So all this talk about Arab unity and the changing course that Arabs are all of a sudden siding with the Hezbollahs, if that's happening to any extent, it's just because Hezbollah is getting its butt kicked, like I spent great time telling you on Friday.
Now, how about the New York Times?
New York Times, as we know, sympathizes with terrorists.
I'll give you a couple examples from August the 6th, yesterday.
A disciplined Hezbollah surprises Israel with its training, tactics, and weapons.
Oh, they are marveling at the New York Times over the military capabilities of a bunch of terrorists.
They're romanticizing them.
The second story from, and that was by Stephen Erlanger and Richard Opal.
The second story, Arab world finds icon in Leader of Hezbollah.
And this was by Neil McFarquhar, who said from Israel last week that he lamented that what we get now are Bush's bombs instead of Kennedy's milk.
Same guy, Arab world finds icon in Leader of Hezbollah, trying to build up the enemy again at the New York Times.
Of course, they're not the enemy to the New York Times.
George W. Bush is the enemy, and anybody allied with him, in this case the Israelis, Bush and the Israelis are the enemy.
The success or failure of any ceasefire in Lebanon will largely hinge on the opinion of one figure, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the Secretary General of Hezbollah, who has seen his own aura and that of his party enhanced immeasurably by battling the Israeli army for nearly four weeks.
Yeah, and they've had a lot of help out there, Neil, from fake, forged photos and pictures, staged events.
You and your buddies in the drive-by media have done a bang-up job in shifting world opinion against the Israelis, but this is just over the line here.
The Secretary General of Hezbollah?
As though they are a legitimate government elected by their people?
Secretary General of Hezbollah?
Who gave him that title?
And if he gave it to himself, why the world do you respect it, Mr. Farquhar?
Secretary General, we are now in the drive-by media in this country extending titles of respect and auras of admiration to terrorist leaders.
Whoopee.
In the zone, Rush Limbaugh, America's anchorman, truth detector, doctor of democracy, general, all-around good guy, harmless, lovable little fuzzball with a brief timeout.