A newly-discovered video–filmed by Occupy Wall Street supporters themselves–reveals that New York Times reporter Natasha Lennard is not merely covering the protests, but is also apparently taking part in planning and executing them.

In the video, Lennard is seen participating as a featured speaker in a discussion among anarchists, communists, and other radicals as they examine the theory, strategy and tactics of the Occupy protests.

The discussion was held at the left-wing Bluestockings book store in New York on Friday, Oct. 14, and filmed and promoted by the radical magazine Jacobin. The audience included participants in, and apparent organizers of, the Occupy Wall Street demonstration in lower Manhattan.

Lennard, who has also written for Politico and Salon, is identified in the video by the panel’s moderator as a freelancer for the Times, and also as the Times reporter who was arrested along with seven hundred activists on the Brooklyn Bridge on Oct. 1.

When Lennard reported on her arrest at the time, she appears to have concealed her own apparent role in the Occupy protests, implying that her arrest was an abuse of press freedom. She used her affiliation with the Times to win her early release.

Sympathetic media expressed shock that a reporter had been taken into custody by allegedly overzealous police. Only sources like Newsbusters questioned that narrative at the time. The video suggests that the skeptics were correct in their suspicions.

In the video of the panel discussion, Lennard reveals herself to be a passionate Occupy supporter, and appears to have personal knowledge of its planned future activities, including illegal occupations of banks in New York City.

We have decided to post the entire video of the panel discussion–below, in full, as first posted by Jacobin magazine. We have made no edits; the jump cuts are apparently caused by the videographer.

Lennard, the woman at far-left (coincidentally), speaks as a “comrade” of the panelists and the audience–one actively part of the far-left intellectual theorizing and organizing behind Occupy, and also as someone with deep knowledge of its plans.

For example, at roughly 1:15:15, an audience member asks a question about how to manage the growing ideological divisions among anarchists and communists as they form “a new society” through the Occupy movement.

Lennard’s answer suggests that she identifies with the anarchist faction holed up at Zuccotti Park–and that she identifies with efforts by Occupy activists to conceal their true beliefs and goals:

(more…)

Yesterday Eric Boehlert made the mistake of trying to equate media coverage of the tea party to NBC’s Dylan Ratigan helping the occupy movement write their messaging while reporting on said movement. Boehlert has yet to provide examples of Fox actively writing tea party messaging. Boehlert is quick to defend NBC as it’s the only network that will consider having him on, albeit rarely.

Today Boehlert takes issue with my remark from last night that the Nazi Party USA endorsed the occupy movement, which they did, on Twitter and their website.

Boehlert’s response:

Obsessive, isn't he?

David Duke says that “thousands of tea partiers” asked him to run, yet never produced a single name from those thousands of tea partiers. Because he says it happened it must be true! When did Eric Boehlert begin listening to and believing a white supremacist? Very telling. Says more about his belief system than that of a tea partier’s.

The guy speaking at the Phoenix tea party apparently showed up when they were allowing citizens to line up and address people via an open mic. No one realized who he was until it was too late. The thing about these instances is though, the tea party runs off crazies. Boehlert defends them.

We also realize that many of these instances were LaRouche plants and progressives which attempted to crash tea parties, get film and photo of themselves doing it, and then later edit it altogether and make it appear as though Nazis, etc., were attending rallies. Lee Fang of Think Progress used without permission video from Adam Sharp who took video of a prog doing just this. Fang dishonestly presented the guy as a real Nazi instead of one of the tea party crashers from the Tea Party Crashers website and short-lived, epically failed movement.

The bottom line is that Media Matters established the yardstick which defines any group that has even the perception of the above as “racist.” The danger in using this yardstick, as demonstrated by my first image, is that it can go both ways. Progressives rarely think about things like that; they’re instant satisfaction, do now think later-type folks. So I’m going to use the yardstick that progressives insist we use and in doing so, progressives come off as exponentially worse in this story.

From my post yesterday:

There is only one group endorsed by the Nazi Party, supported by communists, a group that has scored over athousand arrests, a group where felons are arrested with guns, a group that threatens to kill people, a group where they desecrate the flag and defecate on cop cars, spit on uniformed Coast Guard members, and that group is the Obama-endorsed, cop-killer endorsed, Pelosi-blessed occupy movement for which NBC’s Dylan Ratigan served in some capacity as an editor while reporting on them.

Progressives have had communists march with them and President Obama himself appeared at a rally with hate leader Malik Shabazz, the same NBPP who intimidated voters and hollered about “killing white people” and their babies. We’ve seen numerous instances of antisemitism at these occupy rallies:

(more…)

Over the weekend, AP stories conveying the supposed outrage Asian-Americans felt toward Rush Limbaugh’s mockery of Chinese president Hu Jintao were ubiquitous. The stories were so racially charged and unapologetically one-sided that it was evident someone somewhere was either not telling the whole truth about what Limbaugh said or was not telling the truth about why he said what he said (or that their liberal minds simply couldn’t comprehend the crux of what Limbaugh was trying to accomplish).

As I looked deeper into the AP’s contention about Asian-American outrage toward Limbaugh, I quickly saw that all the news stories rested on the complaints of three different politicians, all of whom happened to be Democrats: an important point which was not brought to the forefront in the coverage. (I guess a headline of “Democrats Outraged at Limbaugh for the 1,000,000^th Time” doesn’t draw near as many readers as “Asian-American Politicians Demand Limbaugh Apology.”)

The three politicians upon whom the demands of the AP stories rest are Representative Judy Chu (D-Ca), Representative David Wu (D-Or), and California state Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco).  All three are quoted as feeling various degrees of disgust with the way Limbaugh mocked the Chinese president’s White House speech last week. Chu said she was “shocked and appalled,” Wu believed Limbaugh demonstrated a “fundamental lack of character,” and Yee called it a “classless act [that] is an insult to over 3,000 years of cultural history.” (There was no mention as to whether these same three lawmakers have been bothered by China’s blatant Human Rights’ violations, evident in China’s ongoing persecution of Christians and their forced abortion/one child policy, or the steadfast Communist mindset that robs their citizens of freedom in a myriad of cruel and unimaginable ways.)

(more…)

During the 8/28 Restoring Honor rally Al Sharpton marched to the National Mall where he and a couple thousand people (some I saw firsthand carrying signs featuring Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck with Hitler staches and bearing words like “TEABAGGERS”) came up over a hundred thousand or so short of matching the conservative turnout.

The mainstream media however did all it could to flame the adversarial attitude portrayed by Mr. Sharpton and inflate the appeal of the cantakerous counter rally.

Not long thereafter the unions, communists, and socialists sponsored the One Nation rally wherein a few thousand again fell short of the massive numbers seen on 8/28.

DSA at One Nation. Photo by Cliff Kincaid.

When the One Nation party was done, SEIU trashed the World World II memorial like frat boys at a kegger. (more…)

Naturally the Old Media is doing its level best to pump up the “One Nation” rally, which gathered in front of the Lincoln Memorial on the National Mall in Washington D.C. yesterday. But despite the glowing reports by the media there is no denying the fact that few people turned out for the anti-Tea Party event sponsored by some 400 of America’s most extreme left-wing organizations and their associates in uniondom.

Despite months of planning the event was a bust. Sponsored by dozens of unions and groups such as the Communist Party USA, various socialist organizations, Code Pink, the racist Latino group La Raza and other extremist groups, organizers hoped to energize the left just ahead of the midterm elections just one month away. But the numbers that have turned out — even with the streets full of union-sponsored buses — pale in comparison to the Glen Beck rally that many feel the lefties were trying to emulate.

Still, the Old Media is putting a sunny face on this debacle. The Washington Post, for instance, says that the One Nation rally is “energizing Liberals,” despite that few turned out to participate.

“Progressive groups hope to draw tens of thousands of supporters to the Mall on Saturday and create a show of force that will rival the conservative tea party movement,” the paper helpfully states in its first paragraph. But photos of the attendance clearly show that only a few thousand were actually in attendance. (more…)

It almost sounds like the set up to a “guy walks into a bar” joke — or maybe a knock-knock joke — but the Washington Post’s Dana Milbank made an assessment of his own political ideology that can’t help but draw a laugh.

As WaPo columnist Howard Kurtz reports, Milbank is being moved to the Post’s editorial pages. But it is what Milbank said of himself that amuses.

“Anybody reading my column would make an informed judgment that I’m left-of-center, and I wouldn’t quarrel with that,” he says. “But strongly ideological people on the left do not recognize me as one of their own.”

I see. So because the wholly whacked-out fringe of the far, far left (see the Communist Party USA, George Soros, or MoveOn.orgers) don’t consider him a sufficiently whacked out, moonbat to suit them… then what, Dana?

Is that supposed to be some sort of mitigating factor for Milbank? He admits to being a leftist, but because the most fringeworthy left doesn’t accept him are we supposed to slap him on the back and welcome him to the right side of the aisle?

The fact is he’s still a leftist ideologue and his work should be taken as that of a leftist ideologue, no matter whether he isn’t left enough for the left-wing fringe.

But let’s have some fun with Milbank’s distinction-without-a-difference style of reasoning. Let’s take his logic and see what other situations we can excuse using it… (more…)

Castro’s regime has agreed to release 52 political prisoners in the coming months and according to the New York Times, “this would reduce the number of prisoners of conscience on the island by about a third.”

“We think that’s a positive sign,” said Sec. of State Clinton. “It’s something that is overdue but nevertheless very welcome.”

“Gosh, Castro only jails about 150 political prisoners?” might remark a typical Times reader (maybe even Hillary). “So why all the fuss about Cuba’s human-rights problems? Heck, we keep almost double that many prisoners in Guantanamo!”

In fact, the Times (“Fidel Castro is not only NOT a Communist, he is decidedly anti-Communist. In Cuba there are no communists in positions of control.” New York Times, June 1959) probably picked up the political prisoner release story from the Associated Press, another outfit with “a past” on Castroism. (more…)

The FBI arrested fiery New York columnist, Vicky Pelaez in late June.  An editor and writer for the Spanish language newspaper El Diario/La Prensa, she was charged with being an unregistered agent of the Russian government.  Her far-left, anti-American columns won accolades from American progressives, and from the Hispanic diaspora in the U.S.  Released on bail to home detention during the Fourth of July long weekend, she was part of the spy swap in Vienna today that saw ten confessed Russian agents exchanged for four Russians accused of working for the U.S.

A sample from a Pelaez editorial in El Diario, translated from Spanish scorched the policies of her adopted country:  “…refusing to hear … the popular resistance and the opinion of the majority of countries in the world, the Big Boss [the United States] supported the putschists’ … illegal [Honduran] presidential elections…” Pelaez finished her Dec. 1, 2009 anti-American rant, written in her comfortable suburban house in Yonkers, N.Y., with a tired revolutionary screech, “as long as injustice and poverty remain dominant, the struggle will continue.”

Soviet intelligence operatives (the KGB and its successor, the SVR), starting in the 1920s, recruited agents in the press to influence American opinion.  The goal of the communist influence messages, as directed by Vladimir Lenin, was to destroy “the Main Enemy” from within.  Lenin used this tactic, learned in his own Revolution, because he knew the Soviet army was too weak to take on the American military.

The influence message, boiled down to its essence was, and is, “America is an irredeemably racist, sexist, foreigner-hating, imperialistic, war-mongering country that deserves to be destroyed.”  Repeating this message over and over, like an advertising campaign, rooted the message deep in the psyches of the past several generations.  The ultimate result of decades of propagating this message through the press, education and academia, and Hollywood has been the attitude known as Political Correctness. (more…)

Unfortunately, the mainstream media (MSM) in their coverage of Arizona isn’t telling the whole story.  This battle has been portrayed as a racial issue, when in fact, it is not at all.

As the originator of the BUYcott concept, I have been asked to speak at BUYcott events in recent weeks.  This allowed me to spend time in shops, restaurants, and hotels in Arizona, and to speak to many people of all races regarding SB1070.  I put on my investigator hat and even I was surprised at how little we really know about the situation on the ground in Arizona.

• LIE #1:  Most minorities are opposed to SB 1070 because they are afraid of being unfairly accused, stopped, racially profiled, or in some way inconvenienced or abused.

The facts:  The hotel where we stayed had Native Americans, Latinos, Hispanics, Middle Easterners, and Asians.  I used my down time to interview them about SB 1070 and I was shocked to learn that not one person I spoke with of any national or ethnic origin was opposed to SB 1070.

They know that dangerous terrorists have established an entire entry strategy utilizing the advantage of our broken borders, and as one Native American told me, “I would rather be asked for my ID than have my people blown to bits by a terrorist.”

Simple enough. (more…)

May Day is upon us – the day when the Communists, Socialists, Marxists and other nuts take to the streets to protest capitalism, individual freedom and America. Coincidentally – I’m sure – it’s the same day immigration reform advocates will be marching en masse across America demanding amnesty for illegals.

New York Times, MSNBC, Washington Post and CNN, do us all a favor: Can you compare the incidences of violence committed by radical Leftists on May Day to those (lack of) stories of violence during the Tax Day Tea Party protests?

Perhaps Bill Clinton, who recently inferred that the Tea Party protests and limited government pundits are leading America towards “violence,” would care to offer his analysis of the violence that is to come on May Day in major cities across America and Europe. Maybe he’d be interested in commenting for a compare/contrast story? New York Times and MSNBC: pick up your pencil and write that down. (more…)

James O’Keefe still gets my vote for investigative journalist of the year.  Teaming with Hannah Giles to expose illegal and immoral tactics deep in the ACORN shakedown operation was brilliant.  Now, O’Keefe has one-upped himself with his exposure of an MSM drowning in its own leftist ideology.

American journalists once cheered for those among their own who were brave enough to risk jail in the quest of exposing corruption and malfeasance.  Yet when O’Keefe and his band of whippersnapper journalists went undercover, disguised as telephone repairmen in the hopes of exposing Senator Landrieu’s denying her own constituents phone access to her, the MSM fell all over themselves denouncing the young men.

Rush to judgment?  No.  It was a stampede.

From MSNBC, CBS, the Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times, Talking Points Memo and others came shrill, utterly false headlines about “attempted bugging” and the “new Watergate,” which are now being corrected or retracted with but a faint whisper.  MSM “journalists” in high-and-mighty places haven’t had this much egg on their faces since their coffee-klatch therapy sessions over the misunderstood, “non-jihadist” Ft. Hood terror attack.

Bravo Mr. O’Keefe, honey! (more…)