LIVE AT FIVE: 11.18.13

“In an age of spin, Princess Pelosi offers feeling and authenticity. Her message is consistent–unshakeable, in fact, no matter the evidence–but she commands daily attention by her on-the-spot, deception-rich variations on the theme. Her lunatic counterfactual art is more appealing than the banal awfulness of the Reliable Sources. See is a Method actress in a production that will close in a dozen months. She stands superior to truth.”

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

When we crouch in the rubble, huddled around a fire for warmth, and try to recall just exactly how things went so horribly wrong with the United States, Princess Pelosi will occupy a particular place of scorn. Lord have mercy on her soul, and visit her despicable political career with a healthy dose of justice.

via Pat Dollard

Category: Democrats, Health Care, Nancy Pelosi

FMJRA 2.0: Day Late & A Dollar Short

Posted on | November 17, 2013 | 14 Comments

— compiled by Wombat-socho

ObamaCare Lie = ‘Incorrect Promise’

Lena Dunham and the Politics of Vagina

Nov. 13: ObamaCare Failure Day

ObamaCare: Death Panels for the DCCC

Rule 5 Sunday: Double-Stuf Veterans Day Weekend Edition

The Endless Debacle of ObamaCare

Idiot Liberal Sees Feel-Good Story, Decides We Need Moral Improvement

Unspeakable Evil: Planned Parenthood Obstructs Child Rape Investigation

Shorter Obama: ‘It Sucks to Be Me’

The Humor-Impaired @MaxBlumenthal and His Hamas-Loving Gang of Thugs

The Fear That Dare Not Speak Its Name

Go, @SarahPalinUSA, Go! Whacks Lauer, ObamaCare on ‘Today’ Show (VIDEO)

James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas Team Exposes Fraud of ObamaCare ‘Navigators’

Deranged Cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt Will Face Contempt of Court Charges?

Relentless Perversity: #FreeKate Freaks Attempt to Silence Courageous Critics

FMJRA 2.0: Master Of Puppets

Cheerleading Coach Nicole Kurowski Craved That Hot, Sweet Teen Meat

Andrew Breitbart Was Right: @MaxBlumenthal Is Despicable

But It Does Get A Vote, And Can Swing An Election To The No-Talent Rodeo Clown

Iran: No Deal Is a Good Deal

The Sicilian Blog Mob

The Schmalfeldtian Fantasy

Maryland: The Crazy State

Dead Citizens Rights Society

Reply To Bill In Kentucky

LIVE AT ~~FIVE~~EIGHT: 11.11.13

Even in Deep-Blue California, ObamaCare Still Inspires Deep Doubts, Poll Finds

Some Kind of Twitter Thing in the Virginia Attorney General’s Race?

Obama Administration Gets Its Benghazi On Over In Afghanistan

When Neal Rauhauser (@Kookpocalypse) Stalked My Army Son’s Facebook Page

LIVE AT ~~FIVE~~EIGHT: 11.12.13

Barrett Brown Does Some Excellent Writing From Jail, Where He Belongs

A Maryland Criminal Arrest Warrant Was Issued Today for Bill Schmalfeldt

Veterans: The Next Generation

Richard Cohen and a Plate Glass Window

LIVE AT ~~FIVE~~SEVEN: 11.13.13

The Politics of Weather

Why Do @MaxBlumenthal Fanboys Hate @AlanaGoodman and @RosieGray?

Fall Off The Planet, Cohen

In The Mailbox 11.14.13

Pro-Abortion Group: ‘Get the Duggars Off TV, Because Auschwitz or Something’

Alec Baldwin Yells ‘Fag’ at Photographer; MSNBC Host Threatens to Sue TMZ

Who Else Has An #ObamaCare I-Told-You-So Card To Play?

LIVE AT FIVE: 11.15.13

Feminists Fear the Republican Uterus

Our Moral Superiors?

Remember the Pro-Pedophile Movement That Liberals Pretend Doesn’t Exist?

Posted on | November 17, 2013 | 124 Comments

Considering how often we’re told that there is no such movement, the ongoing effort to legalize sex with kids sure keeps busy:

The [British] prime minister has rejected a call from a leading expert on public health to lower the age of consent to 15.
Faculty of Public Health president Prof John Ashton said society had to accept that about a third of all boys and girls were having sex at 14 or 15.
He said the move would make it easier for 15-year-olds to get sexual health advice from the NHS.
Downing Street said the current age of 16 was in place to protect children and there were “no plans to change it”.
Official figures suggest up to a third of teenagers have sex before the age of consent.
Prof Ashton said lowering the age by a year could “draw a line in the sand” against sex at 14 or younger.
He said: “We need a debate here. It’s time the adults started talking about the situation to take these enormous pressures off children and young people from becoming sexually active too early.

Notice that this push for lowering the age of consent is coming from academia, which is where the pro-pedophile movement was observable as a distinct phenomenon more than a decade ago.

My prior awareness of this intellectual trend — a movement that is deliberately ignored by mainstream media — was why I hastened to defend Rush Limbaugh in January:

Rush Limbaugh Is Right: The Academic
Pro-Pedophile Movement Is a Real Danger

The origins and history of this movement, which can be clearly traced to Professor Alfred Kinsey’s bogus sex studies in the 1940s, which emerged as political advocacy in the 1960s and ’70s in the wake of the Sexual Revolution, has been documented by Dr. Judith Reisman and others. You can read my 2002 article about Lawrence Stanley, a pedophile lawyer who was once widely cited as an authority about the supposed non-danger of child pornography.

You should also be aware that the academic pro-pedophile movement for many years was most vocal in Europe. Theo Sandfort, a Dutch academic, was a member of the editorial board of the notorious pedophile journal Paidika. Sandfort authored the 2001 book Childhood Sexuality and co-edited the 1990 book Male Intergenerational Intimacy with fellow Paidika contributor Edward Brongersma, who was convicted for having sex with a 16-year-old boy. Theo Sandfort is now on the faculty of Columbia University, demonstrating how American academia has imported European perversion.

However, liberal journalists have actively sought to suppress public awareness of the pro-pedophile movement. Why is this? Because liberals don’t want to admit that this evil deviancy originated with their ideological comrades of the radical Left.

“Childlike innocence is an invention of the bourgeoisie of early capitalism.”
— Olaf Stüben, German pedophile activist, 1981

The media don’t want you to know the truth about this, nor will they confront the “ample evidence of the alliance between gay rights organizations and pedophile activists” in Europe, the influence of which has spilled over into the academic elite everywhere.

Only if you are aware that this movement exists would you have shared my alarm at the “Free Kate” arguments on behalf of a Florida lesbian sex offender: “Kaitlyn Hunt Is Guilty and, Yes, There Is a Movement to ‘Normalize Pedophilia’.”

That story wasn’t just about a couple of teenagers in Florida. We never would have heard of Kate Hunt if she had taken the original plea deal offered by prosecutors, as most such offenders do. But because Hunt and her family believed they could portray her as a victim of homophobia, and thought they would gain support by presenting gay activists with a photogenic victim, there arose a movement which — had it been successful — might have set a legal precedent that could undermine age-of-consent laws nationwide.

And this is what the pro-pedophile movement has always wanted: To eliminate “arbitrary” age-based limits on sexual activity.

Of course, any age limit is in some sense “arbitrary,” and no matter where the law establishes the legal age of consent, there will always be some borderline cases where criminal punishment could be seen as unfair or overly harsh. Yet if the law sets 16 as the age of consent, and an 18-year-old has sex with a 14-year-old, how can anyone argue that punishment for the offense violates the 18-year-old’s “rights” (as Kaitlyn Hunt’s defenders argued) without effectively exposing all 14-year-olds to legalized sexual exploitation?

Happy 14th Birthday! (Batteries not included.)

There is an attitude of antinomian lawlessness and moral relativism that I have called “The Intellectual Astroglide of the Elite,” which seeks to steadily erode our instinctive horror at such perversity.

Professor John Ashton, presented as Britain’s “leading expert on public health,” may not think of himself this way and, if accused of advocating pedophilia, would almost certainly deny it. At some point, however, common sense requires that we ask if the effect of policy is not also the intent of policy, no matter what the advocates of that policy may tell us to the contrary.

One need not accuse Professor John Ashton of being the clandestine agent of a secretive pedophile conspiracy in order to say that pedophiles would welcome a law lowering the age of consent to 15. And if the age of consent were lowered to 15 — common sense tells us, if we have paid attention long enough — then at some point in the future we will hear an argument for lowering the age of consent to 14.

The more “normal” the intellectuals can make this seem, the more acceptable it will become and the more we will be told that opponents of pedophilia are hysterical hateful bigots. Therefore, if opponents of this movement do not speak up now, they will eventually find they are marginalized and stigmatized as “extremists.”

People need to wake the hell up.

UPDATE: “Pedophile problem? What pedophile problem?”

A sweeping child pornography investigation has led to the rescue of 386 children around the world and the arrest of 348 people, Canadian police said Thursday. . . .
Police said 108 people were arrested in Canada and 76 in the U.S. Others were arrested in other countries.
Australian Federal Police commander Glen McEwen on Friday confirmed that 65 men had been arrested in Australia as a result of the Canadian investigation, and six Australian children had been removed from harm.
Police said the children were “rescued from child exploitation” but did not give more details.

(Via Conservative Hideout.)

RECENTLY:

Category: Crime, Culture, Great Britain, Intellectuals, Sex

Obama Is the Subject of the Sentence

Posted on | November 17, 2013 | 63 Comments

You may be old enough to remember the ABC cartoon series, Schoolhouse Rock, one episode of which was “The Tale of Mister Morton“:

Mr. Morton is the subject of the sentence
and what the predicate says, he does.

One of the tricks of media bias is to confuse readers and viewers about who is the subject of the sentence and responsible for action.

A public that is half-educated — or, as is often sadly the case, miseducated — does not have the skills of rhetoric and logic necessary to analyze the ways in which they are deliberately misled by the media, but some of the tricks are so simple anyone can spot them.

The media are attempting to absolve President Obama of responsibility for the failure of his signature health-care law. This blame-shifting requires that someone else be scapegoated in order to preserve the myth of Obama’s hyper-competence. The “fix” the president announced this week, for example, was clearly an effort to scapegoat insurance companies: “This doesn’t change anything other than force insurers to be the political flack jackets for the administration.”

Let’s be clear: Prior to the implementation of ObamaCare, the vast majority of Americans were covered by some kind of health insurance. Maybe you had some complaints about your coverage. Maybe you thought your premiums were too high or the deductibles were too high, but you had insurance, and the president repeatedly promised that if you liked your plan, you could keep your plan, period.

Obama is the subject of the sentence, and what the predicate says, he does: Obama lied.

Well, what about the Republicans?

“Look at all the string of broken promises. If you like your health care plan, you can keep it. Try telling that to the 20 million people who are projected to lose their health insurance if Obamacare goes through . . .”
— Rep. Paul Ryan, vice-presidential debate, Oct. 11, 2012

Obama lied, and Republicans told the truth, accurately predicting that the implementation of ObamaCare would result in the cancellation of millions of private insurance policies.

You might think that, with truth so clearly on one side and falsehood starkly exposed on the other, no one could possibly be confused.

Ah, but you’re not a liberal newspaper editor determined to prevent the blame from being properly allotted to the Democrats.

Patterico notices the Los Angeles Times doing this with a headline, “Obamacare: Critics seize on low enrollment numbers.”

The trick here is to make “critics” the subject of the sentence and, by use of the word “seize,” to make it appear that they are unfairly or dishonestly exploiting the situation. But the “low enrollment numbers” are, in fact, evidence of a failure these “critics” predicted.

Obama is the subject of the sentence, and what the predicate says, he does: Obama failed.

The Los Angeles Times article itself is nearly as biased as the headline:

Just 106,000 Americans successfully signed up in October for health coverage through President Obama’s healthcare law, the administration announced Wednesday in a report that underscored damage from the botched launch of the law and gave critics new fuel in their effort to roll it back.

(Notice the theme established up front: The problem is not the policy, as such, but rather “damage from the botched launch.”)

The tally falls well short of administration hopes that as many as 500,000 people would select a health plan in the first month of enrollment.

(A subtle shifting of the goalposts: We are told the problem is that the enrollment failed to meet “administration hopes,” thus obfuscating the reality that these were not mere “hopes,” but official projections. However, rather than judge the administration by actual results — i.e., a laughable failure — it is suggested that we should credit them for their good intentions, their “hopes.”)

Enrollment has been particularly weak in the 36 states whose new insurance marketplaces are being run by the federal government.
Fewer than 27,000 consumers signed up for coverage on a federally run marketplace. These federal marketplaces rely on the malfunctioning healthcare.gov website, which Obama administration officials are scrambling to repair.

And again, you see, the repetition of the suggestion made at the outset, that the “malfunctioning website” is an isolated aberration, as if the overall policy of ObamaCare was fundamentally sound and this glitch-ridden website was not symptomatic of the larger problem, namely the attempt to impose a one-size-fits-all Washington-controlled solution to the provision of health insurance.

Grant that the editors of the Los Angeles Times know their readership: No Republican would subscribe to a newspaper which is so blatantly biased, and so the remaining subscriber base of the Los Angeles Times — which has been hemorrhaging circulation for 20 years — is composed entirely of Democrats who don’t want to read honest reporting. Just like the New York Times, the Washington Post and practically every other major newspaper in America, the Los Angeles Times has become a Democrat Party propaganda organ.

“Liberal bias is not a matter of unfairness, but rather
a matter of dishonesty — deliberately ignoring some facts,
and misrepresenting other facts, in order to misinform
the public by portraying to them a politically falsified
view of events and personalities.”

The problem is that you’re not angry enough about this.

Category: Barack Obama, Health Care, Media Bias

In Which @ABFalecbaldwin Finally Gets the Kind of Attention He Deserves

Posted on | November 16, 2013 | 76 Comments

Damn you, @ABFalecbaldwin! You've forced me to agree with @sullydish! http://t.co/hbEUe4NXGF

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) November 16, 2013

Alec Baldwin has advantages any man could envy: Wealthy, famous, good-looking, intelligent and talented, Baldwin has been a successful actor since debuting on the NBC soap opera The Doctors at age 22. His breakthrough as a major movie star came in the 1990 film adaptation of Tom Clancy’s classic Cold War thriller, The Hunt for Red October, and Baldwin was also memorable for his role as the brutal company representative Blake in 1992’s Glengarry Glen Ross. For his role as Jack Donaghy on NBC’s comedy 30 Rock, Baldwin won two Emmys, three Golden Globes, and seven Screen Actors Guild Awards.

Why, then, is Alec Baldwin so miserable and angry?

And why does it seem that, every time this high-profile progressive celebrity has a run-in with paparazzi, he starts shouting hateful slurs?

I mean, "bastard," "SOB," "as$hole" — @ABFalecbaldwin skips those, goes directly to gaybaiting. @FilmLadd @vermontaigne @BruceCarrollSC

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) November 16, 2013

If hounded by paparazzi, anyone might cuss, but why does @ABFalecbaldwin always use those slurs? @FilmLadd @vermontaigne @BruceCarrollSC

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) November 16, 2013

Psychoanalyze Homophobic Hulk? Hulk Smash! @DngrMse2001 @rsmccain @instapundit @ABFalecbaldwin @vermontaigne @BruceCarrollSC

— Film Ladd (@FilmLadd) November 16, 2013

Shorter @ABFalecbaldwin: "How dare you accuse me of using a homophobic slur, you fellatio-performing sissypants!"

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) November 16, 2013

Baldwin has been suspended from his MSNBC news show, and has issued a weird public statement via Huffington Post:

I never used the word faggot in the tape recording being offered as evidence against me. What word is said right after the other choice word I use is unclear. But I can assure you, with complete confidence, that a direct homophobic slur (or indirect one for that matter) is not spoken. In the wake of referring to a tabloid “journalist” as a toxic queen, I would never allow myself to make that mistake again, nor would I expose my wife and family to the attendant ridicule. My friends who happen to be gay are baffled by this. They see me as one who has recently fought for marriage equality and has been a supporter of gay rights for many years. Now, the charge of being a “homophobic bigot,” to quote one crusader in the gay community, is affixed.

As someone who is directly opposed to the “gay rights” agenda which, in this case, Baldwin uses as a sort of Teflon shield against the accusation of “homophobia,” let me note that this situation exposes the bizarre Orwellian nature of political correctness. As long as you are supportive of a political agenda, Baldwin seems to believe, this exempts you from any criticism about your words and deeds that may seem like hypocritical betrayals of your avowed politics.

It’s like Al Gore living in a gigantic energy-sucking mansion and traveling by CO2-spewing jets and limos, even while he gets rich by preaching about global warming to the lowly plebians.

Alec Baldwin may be a misogynistic bully — but he’s pro-choice! He may scream hateful slurs — but he’s for “marriage equality”!

And our Nobel Peace Prize-winning president can drone-strike terrorists while running a vast surveillance state, yet as long as he gives lip service to the “progressive” cause, nobody on the Left is supposed to notice these mind-boggling contradictions.

Alec Baldwin supporting gay rights while using homophobic slurs is uncannily like Alec Baldwin supporting Occupy while cutting ads for banks

— Frances Martel (@francesmartel) November 16, 2013

Shorter @ABFalecbaldwin: "It's all about ME, you toxic queens!" http://t.co/7QIhshinHs @BruceCarrollSC @NYDailyNews

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) November 16, 2013

@rsmccain BUT HE SAID HE DIDNT KNOW THEY WERE SLURRRRRS!!! @FilmLadd @ABFalecbaldwin @vermontaigne

— Flux Gaypacitor (@BruceCarrollSC) November 16, 2013

No Joke: .@ABFAlecBaldwin Trots Out His Gay Hairdresser As Proof He’s Not Homophobic http://t.co/Nx0er1svfo via @sharethis

— Infidel Justice (@InfidelJustice) November 16, 2013

Shorter @ABFalecbaldwin "What do you mean, 'homophobic'? Why, some of my favorite hairdressers are limp-wristed mincing nellies!"

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) November 16, 2013

Despite all his advantages, Alec Baldwin seems strangely unhappy, and his latest angry outburst has made him a laughingstock, the butt of endless jokes in a painful ritual of public humiliation. His career will probably survive this embarrassment. Like Charlie Sheen, Baldwin is such a marketable commodity in show business that it is nearly impossible for him to destroy his acting career.

Nevertheless, his humiliation could be a teachable moment — if not for him, at least for others who are watching this public meltdown with a mixture of horror and glee. Whether you like Alec Baldwin or you despise Alec Baldwin, you can learn from Alec Baldwin.

Honestly, @ABFalecbaldwin: Keep it up and you could beat @amandabynes for Best Celebrity Meltdown of the Year. http://t.co/YndjgkWu3p

— Robert Stacy McCain (@rsmccain) November 16, 2013

Everyone wants success. Everyone wants praise and admiration. Most people get far less success, praise and admiration than they want, while a few people seem to get much more than they deserve.

Alec Baldwin has in his lifetime reaped more success, praise and admiration than most people could ever imagine. His estimated net worth is $65 million, his reported salary is $300,000 per TV episode and he was once married to Kim Basinger, for crying out loud.

But it’s never enough, is it? Somewhere deep inside Alec Baldwin there is a gaping void, an abyss in his soul, and from that dark chasm erupt the geysers of hatred that have brought him to shame.

Perhaps some readers could suggest a cure, and perhaps we should be all grateful, for there but for the grace of God go you or I.

(Via Memeorandum with more blog commentary from Legal Insurrection, Twitchy, Weasel Zippers, Gateway Pundit, Ed Driscoll and Conservatives4Palin.)

Category: Celebrities, Gays

Bill Schmalfeldt: Obsessed Much?

Posted on | November 16, 2013 | 62 Comments

You stay classy, Bill Schmalfeldt!

“Schmalfeldt . . . is closest to his sweaty-palmed Happy Place when he is describing degradation of others.”
— Ken White, Aug. 6

Deranged cyberstalker Bill Schmalfeldt has many persistent traits, including habitual dishonesty and a tendency to mimic the rhetoric of his enemies. This latter trait is related to Schmalfeldt’s symptomatic psychological projection — accusing others of committing wrongs of which he is himself spectacularly guilty — but Schmalfeldt’s “monkey see, monkey do” imitations are also a confirmation of the moral and intellectual emptiness Ken White of Popehat has observed:

Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t have principles. Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t have values. Bill Schmalfeldt doesn’t have beliefs. Bill Schmalfeldt has enemies, and then nothing, a black and dank and empty void of sullenness.

Without values or principles, Bill Schmalfeldt is intellectually adrift, blown to and fro by his own gale-force hatreds. So whenever any of his chosen enemies — Aaron Walker, Lee Stranahan, whoever — describes Schmalfeldt’s behavior, it is only a matter of time before Schmalfeldt begins to parrot his enemy’s rhetoric, falsely accusing them in the same terms they have used to accurately describe him.

One can see this clearly in Schmalfeldt’s engagement with John Hoge. We know why Schmalfeldt became obsessed with Hoge, who aided Lee Stranahan when he flew from Texas to Maryland to file harassment charges. (See Stranahan’s account, “Bill Schmalfeldt: The Stranger Who Harassed My Family.”) Hoge was then targeted for similar harassment. He warned Schmalfeldt to cease contacting him and, when Schmalfeldt persisted, petitioned for and was eventually granted a peace order against Schmalfeldt. Hoge’s only interest in Schmalfeldt is to stop his harassment. Because harassment is Bill Schmalfeldt’s raison d’être, however, this illegal behavior persists. Hoge therefore continues (a) describing Schmalfeldt’s harassment, (b) seeking legal action to stop the harassment, and (c) enjoying the hilarious reactions of other spectators watching the carnival of Sideshow Bill’s craziness.

In “monkey-see, monkey-do” fashion, however, Schmalfeldt now routinely claims that Hoge is “obsessed” with him, and that he — the creepy kook Bill Schmalfeldt — is actually the victim of “harassment.”

Amid this twisted knot of psychological projection and rhetorical mimicry, however, the real Bill Schmalfeldt is always present. And one of the most disturbing aspects of his personality is his frequent resort to language about feces, anal sodomy and coprophagy. (See my Sept. 30 post, “Bill Schmalfeldt: Sadism, Sodomy and Other Bizarre Mental Aberrations.”) He clearly has an abnormal fixation:

It goes without saying that no decent person would deliberately fill their Twitter timeline with such foul and disgusting verbal imagery, yet this is Bill Schmalfeldt’s customary and routine mode of discourse.

Nor is this merely a matter of a thuggish personality with an obnoxious penchant for crude language. Rather, this would seem to be a symptom of Bill Schmalfeldt’s perverse psycho-sexual fixations:

Heck, if you’re a man and you’re honest with yourself, you LIKE being on the “doling it out”end of anal sex. How many heterosexual men reading this diary right now have never asked their wife or girlfriend to just take a deep breath, relax, “I’ll just put in the tip and we’ll see how it goes,” and then you ram it home like Captain Kidd jamming his sword back into his scabbard while she hollers “takeitouttakeitouttakeitout” and you tell her to just relax and it won’t hurt so bad and she starts kicking and screaming “takeitOUTtakeitOUTtakeitOUT youfuckingbastardpieceofshit“ and you finally do (because the walls are thin and your neighbors just LOVE calling the cops) and you tell her she should have at least given herself a chance to relax and enjoy it and she (if she’s your wife) doesn’t let you anywhere near her with “that thing” for weeks and if she’s your girlfriend she stops returning your calls?

You stay classy, Bill Schmalfeldt!

Category: Bill Schmalfeldt

Shorter Jeremy Hammond: ‘Blame Bush!’

Posted on | November 16, 2013 | 64 Comments

First, from the Justice Department Web site:

Jeremy Hammond Sentenced To 10 Years In Prison For
Hacking Into The Stratfor Website And Other Company,
Federal, State, And Local Government Websites
Defendant and Others Disclosed Sensitive Information
About Thousands of Innocent Individuals

Preet Bharara, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced today that JEREMY HAMMOND, a/k/a “Anarchaos,” was sentenced in Manhattan federal court to 10 years in prison in connection with his role in, among other hacks, the December 2011 hack of Strategic Forecasting, Inc. (“Stratfor”), a global intelligence firm in Austin, Texas, that affected hundreds of thousands of victims, including employees and subscribers. HAMMOND was also sentenced in connection with his involvement in multiple additional hacks, including computer intrusions into the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Virtual Academy, the Arizona Department of Public Safety, the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association, and the Jefferson County, Alabama, Sheriff’s Office. HAMMOND pled guilty in May 2013, and was sentenced today by Chief U.S. District Judge Loretta A. Preska. . . .

Seems straightforward enough, right? Hammond had a previous federal conviction for hacking the site of Protest Warrior and, because this exploit with “Anonymous” was therefore his second conviction, he was obviously going to do some serious time.

But it was for The Cause, which means that the criminal had to strike a pose as a Heroic Victim and, at his sentencing hearing Friday, Hammond delivered a lecture to the court that included this:

The acts of civil disobedience and direct action that I am being sentenced for today are in line with the principles of community and equality that have guided my life. I hacked into dozens of high profile corporations and government institutions, understanding very clearly that what I was doing was against the law, and that my actions could land me back in federal prison. But I felt that I had an obligation to use my skills to expose and confront injustice — and to bring the truth to light. . . .
My introduction to politics was when George W. Bush stole the Presidential election in 2000, then took advantage of the waves of racism and patriotism after 9/11 to launch unprovoked imperialist wars against Iraq and Afghanistan. I took to the streets in protest naively believing our voices would be heard in Washington and we could stop the war. Instead, we were labeled as traitors, beaten, and arrested. . . .

There you go, the criminal’s creed: Blame Bush!

Category: Crime

« go back — keep looking »

About

This is an area on your website where you can add text. This will serve as an informative location on your website, where you can talk about your site.

The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

LIVE AT FIVE: 11.18.13

Princess Pelosi Gets Her MS14H On

FMJRA 2.0: Day Late & A Dollar Short

Remember the Pro-Pedophile Movement That Liberals Pretend Doesn’t Exist?

Obama Is the Subject of the Sentence

In Which @ABFalecbaldwin Finally Gets the Kind of Attention He Deserves

Bill Schmalfeldt: Obsessed Much?

Shorter Jeremy Hammond: ‘Blame Bush!’

THE FULL METAL JACKET REACH-AROUND AWARD

HIT THE FREAKING TIP JAR!

Search

Recent Posts

RSS reader subscription

MEMEORANDUM

Recent Comments

THE AMAZING GONZO FEED

Major Leagues

Archives

Free Agents

SHAMELESS CAPITALISM

Triple-A Franchises

Blogroll

About

Subscribe to our feed

Search

Admin