GINA COBB

Do You Find the News Depressing?

By DemocracyRules

I know, it happens to me too.  The MSM makes the world seem like a depressing place.

Things sometimes look bad because the MSM is lying, or putting negative spin on positive stories.  They bury the good news, and feature the bad (if it bleeds, it leads).  Recent examples: "U.S. Economy in meltdown", is incorrect.  These recent headlines tell the true story: Economy Improves, Old Media Ignores, Greenspan says worst of credit crisis over, The U.S. economy is structurally strong.

The MSM will predictably lie about certain topics.  On those topics, you can discount the reports 100% or even just reverse the meanings to get the real story.  Here are some key topics:

(1)  Poverty, domestic or foreign.  Any story about the poor getting richer, the average person being better off, or the the size of income disparities getting smaller will be ignored by the MSM.  In Canada recently, the MSM faked some income numbers so they could report a catastrophe.  As Communists, the MSM is absolutely dead-simple incapable of acknowledging that poverty is disappearing, and that capitalism is working.  For every story that cries about poverty, good news is ignored.  Either they are lying or misinterpreting the data, or they are focusing on one negative datum, and ignoring tons of positive data.  Ergo, any poverty reporting can be reversed into : "World Poverty Declining!", "U.S. Most Prosperous Country in History!", "Fewer and Fewer Starving in Africa!".

(2) Paper Recycling. Any story which deals with paper recycling and paper wastage will be misreported.  Why? Because newspapers use up millions of trees per year, and newspapers will never complain that this represents a waste of resources, or causes clear-cutting, or fills up landfills.  So any negative story about paper recycling can usually be reversed into: "NYT and Others in Trouble, Millions of Trees Saved!"

(3) Environmental Catastrophes of any sort are routinely falsified or exaggerated.  E.g., "Massive Volcano Erupts in Chile", really means,  "Chilean Catastrophe Averted, Hundreds of Thousands Safely Evacuated!", or "Ash Fall from Chilean Volcano Produces Massive Increase in Soil Fertility!".

(4) All Global Warming stories are false and can be ignored.

(5) MSM Crybabies. Almost all stories which portray the MSM as victims are false or misleading.  The MSM is unwilling to criticize itself no matter what horrible thing they did.  E.g., "Rotten Reporter Lies to Court, Gets Jail She Deserves!"

(6) Christian Bashing. Almost all MSM stories about Christianity will be biased or falsified.  The good news is that Christians are, by many objective social measures, better people than atheists.  They have lower divorce rates, more marital happiness, better incomes, less depression, and on and on.  These things will not be reported in the MSM because it is controlled by faithless Communist ideologues.  Thus, these stories should read, "Depression, Substance Abuse and Suicide Drops in MSM Who Convert to Christianity!".

(7) Military Bashing. Any story which criticizes the military will be biased or falsified.  For every negative story about the military there are at least a thousand positive stories which go unreported.  Reversal works well for military stories.  So, "Haditha Marines Charged in Barbaric Attack" actually means, "Iraq War the Most Cleanly Fought in History". 

So you see, the News is actually full of positive stories, if you read it or listen to it properly. 

Furthermore, if you get your News from Gina Cobb, you will read about Hedgehog Rescue, funny cartoons and anecdotes, and everyday good things that happen to people.

Pro Patria

P.S. The picture is of Michaëlle Jean, the Governor-General of Canada.  Our head of state is better-looking than your head of state!

 

Let Obama Sweep Wright Under the Rug and Move On? Not So Fast

Recommended from Ace of Spades:  What the Media (The People I Trust To Make Decisions) Decided for Me about Wright

1. Wright's anti-semitic, anti-American, hardcore Marxist radical hatred was entirely occluded from Obama, the world, and most especially the NYT until yesterday. It came as a complete shock to one and all, and no one should hold it against Obama that he cultivated a mutually advantageous political partnership with a Nazi for 20 years. Now he's "repudiated" the Nazi, and we all know that you can consort with Nazis for almost all of your adult life and then simply "repudiate" them at a press availability and the issue goes away entirely.

2. Obama's 20 year political partnership with Wright may raise questions about his judgment, but it is wrongful for his political opponents to raise such questions in campaign ads. Some questions, it seems, are properly raised, but silently, in deep personal meditation, perhaps on an alpine hill while reading Rilke. Certainly we do not need to audibly ask questions about a presidential candidate. That's just hurtful and corrosive of our political process, which relies, at its core, of utter trust in our political leaders without question.

3. Not only does Obama's very late-inning "disowning" of Wright completely insulate him from questions about their 20 year history together, it actually transforms Obama into an anti-Wright, the good, cleanshaven mirror-universe good version of the goateed evil version Wright. Whether or not a transporter malfunction is partly responsible for this is anyone's guess.

4. Obama gets to decide when the Wright issue is not legitimate. He mentioned it being legitimate the other day, now he rules it out as legitimate, stating he didn't want the press to associate him with Wright anymore. As will soon be apparent, Obama gets to decide on behalf our our independent media when an issue is and is not worthy of public discussion.

Read the rest here.

Two Years Ago Today on GINA COBB: Media Not Just Neutral Between Good and Evil, But Actively Pro-Terrorist

Originally published on April 26, 2006:  Media Not Just Neutral Between Good and Evil, But Actively Pro-Terrorist

"Reuters has gone so far as to all but ban the use of "terrorist," which is considered too judgmental.  An unwillingness to play favorites makes sense when reporting on most topics. Mainstream reporters shouldn't choose between Republicans and Democrats or Microsoft and its critics (though in practice they usually do). But is studied neutrality really the right posture when covering a battle against monsters who fly hijacked aircraft into office buildings?"  (Max Boot in "Loose Lips Win Pulitzers" at the Los Angeles Times)

It's even worse than that.  Some in the mainstream media are not just neutral between good and evil.  They have become actively pro-terrorist.  Here's just the latest example:  Referring to Osama Bin Laden not as a "terrorist" but as a "dissident."

Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden in an undisclosed place inside Afghanistan. [AFP] This is an undated photo of Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, in Afghanistan[.] [AP]

Right.  A dissident.  A "dissident" . . . who deliberately engineered the deaths of almost 3,000 innocent men, women and children on September 11, 2001.  A "dissident" who fully intends to take many more innocent lives in the future given half a chance. 

In their anti-Bush rage, the leftists in mainstream media have made the enemy of their "enemy" their friend.  They don't care that the enemy of their "enemy" is deeply evil and dangerous to all decent, civilized people.

They've lost their minds as well as their moral compass.

"Reuters has gone so far as to all but ban the use of "terrorist," which is considered too judgmental.  An unwillingness to play favorites makes sense when reporting on most topics. Mainstream reporters shouldn't choose between Republicans and Democrats or Microsoft and its critics (though in practice they usually do). But is studied neutrality really the right posture when covering a battle against monsters who fly hijacked aircraft into office buildings?"  (Max Boot in "Loose Lips Win Pulitzers" at the Los Angeles Times)

It's even worse than that.  Some in the mainstream media are not just neutral between good and evil.  They have become actively pro-terrorist.  Here's just the latest example:  Referring to Osama Bin Laden not as a "terrorist" but as a "dissident."

Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden in an undisclosed place inside Afghanistan. [AFP] This is an undated photo of Saudi dissident Osama bin Laden, in Afghanistan[.] [AP]

Right.  A dissident.  A "dissident" . . . who deliberately engineered the deaths of almost 3,000 innocent men, women and children on September 11, 2001.  A "dissident" who fully intends to take many more innocent lives in the future given half a chance. 

In their anti-Bush rage, the leftists in mainstream media have made the enemy of their "enemy" their friend.  They don't care that the enemy of their "enemy" is deeply evil and dangerous to all decent, civilized people.

They've lost their minds as well as their moral compass.

Could There Be a More Biased Headline?

This may just be one of the most biased headlines and stories I've seen yet:

'Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy' Leader's Paper Backs Clinton

So now the existence of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" is treated as an established fact as a starting point for what puports to be a straight news story -- at least as long as it's put in quote marks?

And the "vast right wing conspiracy" even has a "leader"?

I'll be eagerly awaiting comparable headlines and stories like these, reported as straight news:

'Racist America-Damning Minister' Continues to Back Obama

'Leftist Media' Continue to Back Democrats 'Regardless of Merit'

Please, bring 'em on!

Two Years Ago Today on GINA COBB: More Evidence of Saddam-Al Qaeda Connections for Journalists to Ignore

Originally published on March 18, 2006:  More Evidence of Saddam-Al Qaeda Connections for Journalists to Ignore

Osama bin Laden requested Iraqi cooperation on terrorism and propaganda.  In January 1997 the Iraqi regime was eager to continue its relationship with bin Laden

Spitzer Coverage: Insta-Celebrity Status for Call Girls

The Eliot Spitzer coverage has taken a strange and unhealthy twist.

I can understand covering the story of a successful, abrasive, arrogant governor's downfall -- and the consequences for the State of New York, the nation, and for the man's family.  It's news; it was so shocking it defied belief at first.

Explaining how Spitzer was caught and enough details to understand what he was up too, I can also understand.

But on -- what is it, Day 3? -- Drudge Report plastered the photo of one of the call girls at the top of his website for all or most of the day, and stories began to appear profiling the suddenly-famous hooker.

Why exactly is one particular call girl, of who knows how many Spitzer spent time and money with, of any relevance whatsoever?  So now suddenly high-priced prositution is cool?  How many more Eliot Spitzers are we aiming to create?

But now ABC News has taken to an even more absurd extreme.  It has found another escort named "Kristen" and reported that she is not "the" Kristen of Spitzer fame.

From Mark Hemingway at The Corner:

It seems that ABC news' hooker hunt is more thorough than I previously imagined. After searching diligently, they've done the public a great service with this news report:

Escort: 'I'm Not THAT Kristen'

A voluptuous brunette escort named Kristen, who advertises her availability online "for discriminating gentlemen," says she is not the "Kristen" linked to New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer.

The online ad for Kristen, featuring provocative semi-nude lingerie photos, includes an update, "I am not the person the Daily News has mentioned in relation to the Spitzer case."

The report does nothing to identify the other Kristen, but breathlessly confirming that another high class escort is also named Kristen certainly advances the the story, no? In order to help ABC news out, if you're reading this and your name happens to Kristen, please IMMEDIATELY contact ABC news at the address below and inform them that you are a) not a prostitute or b) not the prostitute in question:

ABC News
7 West 66^th Street
New York, NY 10023

William F. Buckley, Jr. Has Died at 82

William F. Buckley, Jr. has died at age 82.

Now I feel a little bad that I republished this a couple days ago:  Two Years Ago Today on GINA COBB: Buckley Says U.S. Mission in Iraq Has Failed.

It goes without saying that Buckley made a major contribution to American political thought.  He was not a follower, but a leader -- and a great one.  Among his many achievements, Buckley founded National Review.  That's the place to go today for a terrific tribute to an amazing life.

Shaun Mullen has a William F. Buckley "sampler."

What the NYT Public Editor Didn't Say

Denis Boyles offers some disquieting truths behind the 3,000-word, front-page hit New York Times hit piece on John McCain in "What the Public Editor Didn't Say."

Get a grip! The function of the Times is not to print ‘news.’ It’s to provide like-minded readers with a comforting view of the world.

What That McCain Article Didn't Say

The New York Times public editor has acknowledged that the paper was wrong to run its latest hit piece on John McCain suggesting an extra-marital relationship, without proof:

But in the absence of a smoking gun, I asked Keller why he decided to run what he had.

“If the point of the story was to allege that McCain had an affair with a lobbyist, we’d have owed readers more compelling evidence than the conviction of senior staff members,” he replied. “But that was not the point of the story. The point of the story was that he behaved in such a way that his close aides felt the relationship constituted reckless behavior and feared it would ruin his career."

Philadelphia Inquirer and Minneapolis Star Headed Out the Floor

By DemocracyRules

h/t Small Dead Animals

They will go bankrupt soon unless they cut staff or increase revenues.  Is this new News or the same old news called new News?

Newspapers seem determined to ride the market right down to the bottom.  Confronted with change or extinction, they have chosen extinction. 

Marshall McLuhan said "The Medium is the Message," meaning that the medium will determine what type of information is transmitted, and how it is consumed.  McLuhan said newspapers were a 'hot' medium, served up in chunks, where you had to work to swallow it as it was, take it or leave it.  'Cool' media involve the person as a participant, and people can interact with the medium, engaging with myriad images, watching bits and pieces and changing channels or web sites. Hence, his 'Global Village' of cool media consumers. 

TV is 'cool' but blogs are cooler.  Bloggers, readers, and commenters create interactive and interlocking spheres of experience.  Forty years ago McLuhan said the hot media were doomed.  I wish they would hurry up.

Time and Reuters Print More Palestinian Fauxtography; When Will the World Decide the Palestinians Have Lied and Killed One Time Too Many?

"The Israeli embargo has left the Gaza Strip without electricity. The Palestinian Parliament was forced to meet by candlelight on Tuesday night."  Photo by Mohammed Salem and Reuters. 

One little problem:  According to reporters, this picture was taken during broad daylight -- the curtains were drawn and candles lit on purpose to make a good Palestinian victimology photo. 

~ ~ ~

Here we go again.

Time, Reuters, and other Western journalists have willingly passed along more Palestinian fauxtography, printing without comment photos showing the Palestinian parliament supposedly meeting by candlelight due to a cutoff of electricity by -- you guessed it-- everyone's favorite democracy to despise -- Israel.

There's only one problem.  The photos were taken during broad daylight.  Curtains were drawn and the candles were set up on purpose to create fake victimhood for press and, more importantly, worldwide public consumption.

Reuters and Time ate it up with a spoon, and then tried to feed it to you.

A Blog for All has more details.

From the Jerusalem Post (via a commenter at Don Surber):

On at least two occasions this week, Hamas staged scenes of darkness as part of its campaign to end the political and economic sanctions against the Gaza Strip, Palestinian journalists said Wednesday.

In the first case, journalists who were invited to cover the Hamas government meeting were surprised to see Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh and his ministers sitting around a table with burning candles.

In the second case on Tuesday, journalists noticed that Hamas legislators who were meeting in Gaza City also sat in front of burning candles.

But some of the journalists noticed that there was actually no need for the candles because both meetings were being held in daylight.

"They had closed the curtains in the rooms to create the impression that Hamas leaders were also suffering as a result of the power stoppage," one journalist told The Jerusalem Post. "It was obvious that the whole thing was staged."

Another journalist said he and his colleagues were told to wait for a few minutes before entering the chamber of the Palestinian Legislative Council so that each legislator would have time to light his candle. He said that when he saw that the curtains had been closed to prevent the light from entering, he realized that Hamas was trying to manipulate the media for political gain.

Palestinians also shut down a generator and immediately staged a candlelight march for media consumption on Sunday night, according to Elder of Ziyon.

~ ~ ~

What will it take for the nations of the world to get a grip on reality and tell the Palestinians that enough is enough? 

The Palestinians have delivered to the media and the world one calculated lie after another, of which the fake power outages and lying about Hamas' deliberate destruction of the Egyptian wall are only the latest example. 

But the lies are just the beginning.  The Palestinians are currently shooting thousands of rockets into Israel with the deliberate intention of terrorizing civilians, taking lives, and destroying property. 

The Palestinians have proven again and again that they have no regard for innocent human life.  They have again and again taken innocent human lives by the most cruel and wanton means possible, including: (a) use of ambulances to deliver explosives; (b) arranging to have a Palestinian woman whom Israelis were offering free medical treatment for extensive scars detonate a suicide bomb; and (c) shooting small, pacifier-sucking children and their parents as they cowered in their bedrooms, to pick just few of the thousands upon thousands of Palestinian atrocities that could be noted.

NY Times Thumps Romney With Juvenile Critique

How nice of the New York Times to let us know that "Romney Leads in Ill Will Among G.O.P. Candidates."

Romney doesn't manifest "ill will," mind you.  He "leads in" it -- meaning, that others manifest ill will toward him, with or without reason.  The fact that he's been a frontrunner in some early contests is, of course, reason enough.

But how exactly does one "lead" in ill will, anyway?  Apparently, the measuring stick is rather juvenile:

In stark contrast to Mr. Romney, Mr. McCain seems to be universally liked and respected by the other Republican contenders, even if they disagree with him.

Mr. Schnur used a schoolyard analogy to compare Mr. Romney, the ever-proper Harvard Law School and Business School graduate, to Mr. McCain, the gregarious rebel who racked up demerits and friends at the Naval Academy.

“John McCain and his friends used to beat up Mitt Romney at recess,” Mr. Schnur said.

It's the shallow sort of "analysis" that passes for news at the New York Times these days:  Using schoolyard taunts of "nobody likes you" to try to discredit a candidate who is doing well in the polls.

Since when do we choose candidates based on whether the candidates competing against them like them, anyway?

I can't wait to see the next New York Times article entitled "Clinton Leads in Ill Will Among Dem Candidates."  There certainly is growing anger toward Hillary Clinton and her husband in the Democratic Party.

Go ahead, New York Times -- tell us?  Who leads in ill will among the Dem candidates?

While you're at it, which major American newspaper "leads in ill will" from the American public?

Just curious.

Dangerous MSM Misstatements About Iraq WMD

By DemocracyRules

'Research' Will Readily Fit Into One's Politics If One Ignores the Evidence.

A new MSM 'study' accuses:  ... "in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both." It claims Bush "led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

Research which ignores key evidence will never be considered valid by experts in research methodology.  In a recent posting I cited a large body of research which indicates that Saddam had WMD.  I describe how he hid these weapons programs and who helped him.  I also explain how he intended to get more in the near future.  I provided detailed citations and sources.

Gina has also written often about this in detail, e.g.: Iraq Trained Terrorists Before War; Also Paid Terrorists in Cash

The MSM 'study' is a collection of assertions of various journalism groups who are ignoring the large body of evidence which disproves their claims.

Just one quote from my posting which disproves the central assertion that Bush conspired to deliberately 'deceive the nation':

Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002, verbatim from the Senate record: "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security."

WMD are not funny or trivial and they should not be used as political footballs.  MSM distortions can produce massive suffering and unnecessary death.

War Games at the New York Times

Mark Steyn writes on the fictional horrors of war that have captured the imagination, if not the common sense, of the editors of the New York Times  (Via Lucianne):

Well, it's in the New York Times: "a series of articles" – that's right, a whole series – "about veterans of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan who have committed killings, or been charged with them, after coming home." It's an epidemic, folks. As the Times put it:

"Town by town across the country, headlines have been telling similar stories. Lakewood, Wash.: 'Family Blames Iraq After Son Kills Wife.' Pierre, S.D.: 'Soldier Charged With Murder Testifies About Postwar Stress.' Colorado Springs: 'Iraq War Vets Suspected in Two Slayings, Crime Ring.'"

Obviously, as America's "newspaper of record," the Times would resent any suggestion that it's anti-military. I'm sure if you were one of these crazed military stalker whackjobs following the reporters home you'd find their cars sporting the patriotic bumper sticker "We Support Our Troops, Even After They've Been Convicted." As usual, the Times stories are written in the fey, more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger tone that's a shoo-in come Pulitzer time:

"Individually, these are stories of local crimes, gut-wrenching postscripts to the war for the military men, their victims and their communities. Taken together, they paint the patchwork picture of a quiet phenomenon, tracing a cross-country trail of death and heartbreak."

"Patchwork picture," "quiet phenomenon."… Yes, yes, but exactly how quiet is the phenomenon? How patchy is the picture? The New York Times found 121 cases in which veterans of Iraq and Afghanistan either "committed a killing in this country, or were charged with one." The "committed a killing" formulation includes car accidents.

Thus, with declining deaths in the war zones, the media narrative evolves. Old story: "America's soldiers are being cut down by violent irrational insurgents we can never hope to understand." New story: "Americans are being cut down by violent irrational soldiers we can never hope to understand." In the quagmire of these veterans' minds, every leafy Connecticut subdivision is Fallujah and every Dunkin' Donuts clerk an Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

It was the work of minutes for the Powerline Web site's John Hinderaker to discover that the "quiet phenomenon" is entirely unphenomenal: It didn't seem to occur to the Times to check whether the murder rate among recent veterans is higher than that of the general population of young men. It's not.

Au contraire, the columnist Ralph Peters calculated that Iraq and Afghanistan vets are about one-fifth as likely to murder you as the average 18-to-34-year-old American male. Better yet, the blogger Iowahawk meticulously drew his own "patchwork picture" of another "quiet phenomenon": the Denver newspaper columnist arrested for stalking, the Cincinnati TV reporter facing child-molestation charges, the Philadelphia anchorwoman who went on a violent drunken rampage. As Iowahawk's one-man investigative unit wondered:

"Unrelated incidents, or mounting evidence that America's newsrooms have become a breeding ground for murderous, drunk, gun-wielding child molesters?"

Iowahawk's parody is here.  It's much more amusing than anything the New York Times sees fit to print.

Update:  Bob Owens at Pajamas Media has more.

Earlier:

• NY Times on Iraq: See No Success, Hear No Success, Speak No Success
• New York Times Really, Really Regrets Dead Soldier's Family Chose to Be Hurt by Video NYT Is Still Showing
• New York Times Covers Up Danger From Iran
• NY Times Demanded Bank Monitoring Program It Just Destroyed
• New York Times Lovingly Profiles Gitmo Detainee Without Noting Terrorist Ties

MSM Accuses Canada of Accusing US of Torture

By DemocracyRules

How the MSM loves to chase its tail. The Canadian MSM implies that the Canadian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (the equivalent of US State Dept.) is accusing the US of torture. 

An unknown person inside the Ministry put together a power point presentation on torture which mislabeled US interrogation techniques.  It calls torture such things as forced nudity, blindfolding, forced nudity, hooding, forced nudity, isolation, forced nudity, sleep deprivation, and forced nudity.  It also mentions forced nudity.  It calls Gitmo a place where torture is likely practiced. (Apparently these 'torturers' need practice). 

Does the forced nudity include making inmates take a shower, or what?

Amnesty Internationale obtained the document as part of its lawsuit accusing the Canadian government of doing a bad thing by transferring detainees captured by the Canadian Forces to Afghanistan's custody.  So far they seem a little short on proof of wrongdoing regarding that subject, so now this.

"The emergence of the document ... is bound to strain relations with the two countries with which Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper has sought to strengthen ties during his two years in power."  The 'Ottawa Citizen' adds hopefully. 

For this to be true the Canadian government would actually have to accuse the US of something.  As soon as the MSM launched this story, Minister of Foreign Affairs Maxime Bernier immediately disavowed the document. "The training manual is not a policy document and does not reflect the views or policies of this government," said Bernier's spokesman.

Darn it must be hard for the MSM to watch their stories turn to vapor.   Oh well, good or bad it will all be fish wrap tomorrow.  It's clear it's not just the US State Dept. which is riven with leftists who think that they are a separate government unto themselves.  It's common in Western democracies. 

By the way did I mention the forced nudity?

Ms. Magazine Refuses Ad Depicting Successful Women in Israel

Why would Ms. Magazine refuse to publish this ad that shows photos of three women holding high government positions in Israel and says, "This is Israel"?

Abraham Miller, writing at American Thinker, blames it on anti-Israel bias, and there's really no other obvious explanation:

Of the three women pictured here, one is the President of the Supreme Court, the second the Vice Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs, and the third is the Speaker of the Parliament.  Women in positions of real power, and all are members of a Middle East government.

Any magazine committed to feminism, the empowerment of women, and the evolution of women's rights in the Middle East would hunger for such a photo, or so you would think.

Yet, MS. Magazine refused to publish these photos of Dorit Beinish, Tzipi Livni, and Dalia Itzik, three Middle East women whose society does not treat women as chattel and encourages the development of  their full human potential.

The problem for MS was that these are Jewish women, holding office in Israel, and the caption beneath the photo reads, "This is Israel."

This is not the face of Israel the left wants people to see. 

This is not the David (Palestine) and Goliath (Israel) commonly depicted in news footage of Palestine children throwing stones at Israeli Jeeps and tanks. 

This not the probably contrived photo of Israelis "shooting" Muhammad Dura, as his father uses his own body to cover him. 

This is not the phony "massacre" at  Jenin with the destruction and carnage at Grozny.

Today's political left has embraced an authoritarian mindset that bifurcates the world into distinct stereotypic groups.  This is the mindset that dominates our politically correct universities and has produced generations of students who have been indoctrinated into seeing the world as divided into one of the oppressed and oppressor.

. . . . My liberal Jewish friends and supporters of Ms. Magazine and its advertisers should ask themselves this simple question: From what other country would Ms. Magazine refuse to put three women on its cover?

From China which occupies Tibet?

From Mozambique where dictatorship has run amuck?

From any of a number of societies where women are treated as chattel, mutilated, and denied the rudiments of self determination? 

Israel and Israel alone is shunned.

For Ms. Magazine to reject such an innocuous and woman-affirming ad simply because it reflects positively in one respect on the nation of Israel is truly sad and wrong.

What does it say about a magazine that it cannot let one positive word be printed about an entire nation, and a self-governing democracy at that?

This is not just bias.  This is outright capitulation to the Islamic terrorists who are committed to the destruction of Israel and, in fact, every Western democracy.  Those same terrorists would eliminate Ms. Magazine if they could.

Given this pitiful and revealing example of extreme editorial distortion at Ms. Magazine, anyone who bothers to read Ms. Magazine is certain to end up sadly Ms.informed.