Posts

Washington Post Super Bowl Ad Features Fake Journalist Khashoggi

/0 Comments/in , /by

The self-congratulatory multimillion-dollar Washington Post advertisement that played during Super Bowl 53 highlighted the risks that journalists undertake to report the news, but also fraudulently represented an Islamist activist as one of those journalists.

The ad spot, which was narrated by Tom Hanks, features a photo of the Normandy landings during World War II, among other moments in U.S. history, including the Apollo 11 mission to the moon (which obviously did not have any journalists on board). The recurring theme is that journalists have been a part of the most ambitious, dangerous moments in our country’s history. The advertisement concludes by showcasing journalists who were captured or killed doing their job. “Knowing keeps us free,” Hanks concludes, marking the sacrifice that many journalists have made to report the news.

However, the last person represented as a journalist in the ad is the late Jamal Khashoggi, who, as I’ve written extensively, was not a journalist at all. Khashoggi was a lifelong Islamist activist and an avowed ally to Islamist terrorists and extremist organizations. He also had violent tendencies that sometimes appeared in his columns. Khashoggi hoped that Israel would “die by force” at the hands of Hamas. He continued to support al Qaeda-linked individuals and groups until his last days.

Decades ago, when he was in the good graces of the Saudi monarchy, Khashoggi was a correspondent for state-controlled Saudi media operations, but he was never a journalist who was free to report the news as he saw it. Khashoggi was an information operator, a propagandist until his last days.

Jamal Khashoggi was murdered in October after he entered a Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey. The killing of the recently hired Washington Post Global Opinions columnist, who had previously taken self-exile in the United States, provided the spark for a foreign propaganda firestorm. A spat that should have been exclusively between Turkey and Saudi Arabia was weaponized by Saudi Arabia’s enemies — mostly Qatar and Turkey — to weaken Riyadh’s foreign policy and its alliance with the United States.

Following Khashoggi’s death, the U.S. legacy media published countless anonymously sourced pieces, which came almost exclusively from foreign intelligence agencies, that claimed Khashoggi was murdered in a horrific fashion and that he was killed on direct orders from Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (MBS), who is next in line to the Saudi throne. After Khashoggi’s death, the Washington Post waged an all-out information war against Saudi Arabia in defense of its departed contributor, taking to extreme, reckless lengths to do so. The Post has routinely featured op-eds from high-ranking Iranian terrorist regime officials, Houthi rebel leaders who have called for death to America and have been implicated in the torture of journalists, and Muslim Brotherhood leaders who have supported terrorist organizations.

Evidence continues to emerge that Khashoggi was not the man that the media represented him as. Not only was he an unreformed Islamist activist who was dedicated to anti-democratic ideals, we now know he was working in tandem with elements of the government of Qatar to spread its foreign policy priorities into the pages of the Washington Post.

“Text messages between Khashoggi and an executive at Qatar Foundation International show that the executive, Maggie Mitchell Salem, at times shaped the columns he submitted to The Washington Post, proposing topics, drafting material and prodding him to take a harder line against the Saudi government,” the Post reported in a piece that attempted to whitewash his collusion with Doha. Additionally, the Post report disclosed that Khashoggi’s stories were reviewed by a translator who worked for the Qatari embassy in Washington, D.C. The late Washington Post columnist had also been working with a who’s who of U.S.-based Islamist operatives on so-called “Islamic Democracy” promotion, which was largely a front for his preferred Muslim Brotherhood-aligned policies.

The $5+ million dollars spent on the Super Bowl ad could have gone to hiring real journalists — the type who willingly risk their lives every day to bring us unfiltered stories from across the globe, whether they are deployed to war zones or are citizen journalists reporting from inside totalitarian regimes. Khashoggi was not one of them. For the Washington Post to pretend that Jamal Khashoggi was a journalist disgraces the legacy of those who have paid the ultimate sacrifice in search of the absolute truth. (For more from the author of “Washington Post Super Bowl Ad Features Fake Journalist Khashoggi” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Philadelphia Eagles Quarterback Plans to Become a Pastor

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Nick Foles Plans to Become a Pastor After Football

By ABC News. Nick Foles has a calling far greater than throwing touchdown passes . . .

“I want to be a pastor in a high school,” Foles said Thursday. “It’s on my heart. I took a leap of faith last year and signed up to take classes at seminary. I wanted to continue to learn and challenge my faith. It’s a challenge because you are writing papers that are biblically correct. You want to impact people’s hearts.”

Foles is part of a team that has a strong Christian brotherhood. MVP contender Carson Wentz has been outspoken about his faith and many players spend a lot of time together in prayer, studying the Bible and sharing devotionals.

Foles was one of the study leaders during his first stint in Philadelphia and has become a go-to source for younger guys. Left guard Stefen Wisniewksi also plans to become a pastor after his career ends. (Read more from “Nick Foles Plans to Become a Pastor After Football” HERE)
________________________________________

By ABC News. The underdog Philadelphia Eagles upset the defending champion New England Patriots, 41-33, Sunday night, to win their first Super Bowl ever.

The victory over the dynastic Patriots was pulled out shortly after Eagles defensive end Brandon Graham stripped 40-year-old New England quarterback Tom Brady in the final minutes, setting up a 44-yard field goal from rookie kicker Jake Elliot with just over a minute left.

The Eagles were an underdog in Super Bowl LII as the NFC squad, led by an untested coach with only two years at the reins and a backup quarterback, 29-year-old Nick Foles, who had never won a playoff game before this season. New England, at most betting outlets, was favored to win by 4.5 points.

Foles was thrust into the starting role after MVP contender Carson Wentz was lost for the season when he suffered a torn ACL and LCL in a week 14 win over the Los Angeles Rams. (Read more from “Philadelphia Eagles Win Superbowl” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Ad Might Have Been the Most Politically Charged Commercial of the Entire Super Bowl

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Cellular phone company T-Mobile took a strong political stance Sunday with a Super Bowl commercial that had nothing to do with mobile phones.

The ad, narrated by liberal actress Kerry Washington, suggested that today’s infants will grow up to promote equality, in part by demanding “fair and equal pay” and loving “who (they) want.”

As Washington spoke, the camera panned over a diverse group of babies, as a lullaby version of Nirvana’s “All Apologies” played in the background. The minute-long commercial was titled, “Change starts here.”

“Welcome to the world little ones,” Washington said at the start of the ad.

“You come with open minds and the instinct that we are equal,” she continued. “Some people may see your differences and be threatened by them, but you are unstoppable. You’ll love who you want; you’ll demand fair and equal pay; you will not allow where you come from to dictate where you’re going.”

“Change starts here,” Washington concluded.

As noted by the Washington Examiner, the ad stood out, as many of the companies who paid to air commercials during Super Bowl LII avoided politics altogether.

T-Mobile’s choice to take a stance, though, seemed to be an intentional one.

“Brands have an important role in changing culture,” Nick Drake, T-Mobile’s executive vice president of marketing, told The Wall Street Journal. “There is always going to be some risk with these things, but we think this subject matter is something everybody can agree on.”

In a blog post on the company’s website, T-Mobile CEO John Legere noted that the company chose to air the ad because “this moment in history calls for something different.”

Legere emphasized that his company takes pride in listening to its customers, no matter their “economic class, race, sex, creed, gender identity, sexual orientation.”

Our customers are America. And there’s a more important conversation they’re having right now,” he said, adding, “We wanted to use our airtime to further that conversation by making this simple point: We all started in the same place. We are more alike than different.”

But at least on Twitter, many users claimed the T-Mobile ad’s message was unnecessarily politically charged. Some even suggested that T-Mobile was simply “pandering” to liberals.

Others pointed out irony in the fact that T-Mobile was able to air their commercial, but the NFL rejected an ad from a veterans group that encouraged fans to stand during the playing of the national anthem.

It’s far from the first time Legere has become embroiled in controversy. In April 2015, he got into a Twitter argument with then-businessman Donald Trump after the real estate magnate said T-Mobile’s service was “terrible.” (For more from the author of “This Ad Might Have Been the Most Politically Charged Commercial of the Entire Super Bowl” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Patriots Didn’t Just Beat the Falcons. They Crushed the Liberal Media

/0 Comments/in , , /by

History was made Sunday night when the New England Patriots came back from a 21–3 halftime deficit in Super Bowl 51 to pull an historic and stunning overtime victory, defeating the Atlanta Falcons 34 to 28.

Patriots fans are understandably exuberant. Atlanta fans are beyond dejected. And the liberal media is eating crow.

You see, prior to the game, the liberal media had determined that quarterback Tom Brady’s friendship with Donald Trump made it unacceptable to root for the Patriots, unless of course you are a bigoted, racist, homophobic deplorable.

On Feb. 1, The New York Times ran an expose on “The uncomfortable love affair between Donald Trump and the New England Patriots.” The piece attempted to shame the Patriots by pointing out the team’s ties to the president and noted that “no small number of fans are convinced that the Patriots (like Trump) achieve their victories through dubious means and wish they would just go away and get off their TVs forever.”

The New York Daily News praised Bill Maher for an “epic rant” in which the progressive comedian and host of “Real Time with Bill Maher” went on a profanity-laced tirade declaring his opposition to a Patriots’ victory.

“The Falcons are playing a team where the owner, the coach and the star quarterback all love Donald Trump,” said Maher. “So I’d really like for them to lose by a score of a million f–king thousand to none.”

The Los Angeles Times ran an op-ed by sports documentary producer Kelly Candaele declaring his support for the Falcons on the basis of the “loathsome politics” of Tom Brady, Bill Belichick, and Robert Kraft.

SB Nation brought up the controversy between President Trump and Congressman John Lewis, D-Ga. (F, 22%) — who represents part of Atlanta — declaring the Super Bowl was “Donald Trump vs. the city of Atlanta.”

Slate even ran an explainer titled “How to pull for the Patriots in the Age of Trump.” But look closely at the URL on that piece and you’ll see an alternative headline poses a moral quandary to Slate’s audience: “Is it morally acceptable to root for the New England Patriots in the Super Bowl?”

One of the big moral questions Slate tackles is: “Is it cool to like a football team because its owner and some of its players like a politician I disagree with?” Truly the philosophical question for the times we live in.

A less philosophical individual called for a “boycott” of the Patriots way back in November.

For a while, it looked like the Falcons were indeed going to crush the Patriots. And progressive Twitter couldn’t have been happier.

And then, in an uncanny election night parallel, things began to turn around on the liberals. With a strip-sack, a miracle catch, and a tenacious drive by Tom Brady, the Pats turned the game around for the win in overtime.

Things were looking a lot like Election Night.

The annoying liberals rooting for a Patriots defeat, they were all wrong.

But the best reaction to the Patriots win is captured with one deleted tweet.

Eat crow, lefties.

Eat. Crow. (For more from the author of “The Patriots Didn’t Just Beat the Falcons. They Crushed the Liberal Media” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Super Super Bowl: Patriots Pull off Biggest Super Bowl Comeback Ever!

/0 Comments/in , /by

Tom Brady has a record fifth Super Bowl win for a quarterback after the biggest comeback in the game’s history, and one of the greatest catches.

James White ran 2 yards for a touchdown on the first possession of overtime, and the Patriots came back from 25 points down for a 34-28 win over the Atlanta Falcons in Super Bowl 51.

The Patriots drove to the tying score with help from a unbelievable catch by Julian Edelman, who somehow kept the ball off the turf on a diving grab of a tipped pass that bounced off a defender’s shoe. (Read more from “The Super Super Bowl: Patriots Pull off Biggest Super Bowl Comeback Ever!” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Rush Limbaugh Just Nailed What the REAL Problem With the Super Bowl Halftime Show Was

/10 Comments/in , /by

For conservative talk radio icon Rush Limbaugh, a political discussion can often dovetail with his passion for professional football. Following a controversial halftime show during Sunday’s Super Bowl, Limbaugh had the opportunity to merge the two subjects for a segment of his program on Monday.

“I’ll tell you, the observation is this,” Limbaugh said. “You have in the Super Bowl, you have the pregame, which features the anthem with a giant American flag spread out over the entire field. You have the military, uniformed military all over the place. You have an Air Force or Navy, not sure which, fly by after the anthem” . . .

In stark contrast to that opening program, he argued, was a halftime performance by Beyonce that some critics found to be politically charged and anti-police. This dichotomy, however, has been present in Super Bowls past, according to Limbaugh’s theory on the matter.

“So you have the traditional pro-America, patriotic, out-of-this world pregame show,” he said, “and then you get to the halftime of the Super Bowl. And what the halftime show of the Super Bowl is, to me anyway, is representative of the cultural decay and the political decay and the social rot that is befalling our country.” (Read more from “Rush Limbaugh Just Nailed What the REAL Problem With the Super Bowl Halftime Show Was” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Best Response yet to the Pro-Abort Freak-Out Over That Doritos Superbowl Ad

/8 Comments/in , /by

Pro-aborts lost their minds yesterday after Doritos aired a commercial that…*gasp*…showed an ultrasound of an unborn baby . . .

The humorous commercial showed a dad eating a bag of Doritos while his wife gets an ultrasound, and the baby tries to grab at the Doritos in his hands . . .

Since last night there hasn’t been any shortage of responses to NARAL’s bizarre anti-scientific, anti-baby, and anti-human extremism.

But one of the best responses I’ve read comes from Dr. Robert George, a pro-life professor at Princeton University, who posted this on Facebook:

I gather that the really big news, as always, had to do with a commercial advertisement that was broadcast in the course of the game. Evidently, a potato chip manufacurer, or some such profit-driven purveyor of packaged foodstuffs, showed a video image of an unborn baby. This shocked and appalled the folks at NARAL, the big abortion lobby, who promptly accused the company responsible for the ad of “humanizing the fetus.” Since, however, the fetus in the video was, by all accounts, a human fetus, the offspring of human parents, and not a bovine, canine, or feline fetus, it’s less than clear how it is that the potato chip company (or whatever it was) is to blame for the humanization. Surely NARAL’s complaint would be more fairly lodged against God, or nature, or plain old biological reality.

(Read more from “The Best Response yet to the Pro-Abort Freak-Out Over That Doritos Superbowl Ad” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Dangerous Game?: Feds Say Terror Suspect Eyed Attack on Super Bowl

/0 Comments/in , /by

Authorities said Tuesday that a Phoenix man who helped orchestrate a shootout at last month’s “Draw Muhammad” event in Texas also had aspirations to join ISIS and attack the Super Bowl.

Abdul Malik Abdul Kareem, 43, was arrested last week on charges related to the May 3 attack in Garland, Texas that led to the deaths of two roommates from Phoenix. An indictment filed in federal court in Phoenix says Kareem hosted the gunmen in his home beginning in January and provided the guns they used when they attacked security guards outside the event.

At Tuesday’s hearing, FBI special agent Dina McCarthy described how a witness and a confidential informant learned about Kareem’s intentions to join ISIS, including watching the group’s propaganda videos with the Texas shooters Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi.

McCarthy said a 2012 investigation into Kareem determined he had a terrorism training document on his computer. She alleged he wanted to attack the Super Bowl when it was in Arizona this year, but didn’t provide the specifics about how serious he was.

The magistrate denied bail for Kareem, who is charged with conspiracy, making false statements and interstate transportation of firearms with intent to commit a felony. (Read more from “Dangerous Game?: Feds Say Terror Suspect Eyed Attack on Super Bowl” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Terminally Ill Super Bowl Champion Is Urging His State to Reject Legalizing Assisted Suicide

/4 Comments/in , /by

The “right-to-die” debate is ramping up across the nation as a number of states consider passing legislation that would allow terminally ill adults to take their own life.

Among them is Maryland, where lawmakers yesterday heard emotional testimony from former Ravens linebacker O.J. Brigance, who said he’s enjoyed some of the most meaningful years of his life while terminally ill.

“I did not create my life, so I have no right to negate my life,” Brigance stated in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. “Since being diagnosed, I have done a greater good for society in eight years, than in my 37 years on earth.”

Brigance has been battling ALS—also known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease—for eight years . . .

He urged lawmakers to reject Maryland’s Richard E. Israel and Roger “Pip” Moyer Death With Dignity Act, introduced by Sen. Ron Young and Del. Shane Pendergrass, both Democrats. (Read more from “This Terminally Ill Super Bowl Champion Is Urging His State to Reject Legalizing Assisted Suicide” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Creationist Leader Slams Cruise Ship Super Bowl Commercial for Promoting Mindless Evolution (+video)

/2 Comments/in , /by

As usual, Super Bowl commercials caught a fair bit of attention this year, though there was one spot in particular for Carnival Cruise Lines that sparked an evolution debate after catching the attention of creationist leader Ken Ham, founder of the Answers in Genesis ministry, who accused the company of “blatantly using evolution” to advertise its cruises during the big game.

The commercial, which featured a portion of one of President John F. Kennedy’s speeches from 1962, focused on peoples’ supposedly inherent connection to the sea. Images of ships and the ocean were shown as Kennedy’s voiceover described a connection between human beings and water.

“I really don’t know why it is that all of us are so committed to the sea, except I think it’s because in addition to the fact that the sea changes and the light changes, and ships change, it’s because we all came from the sea,” Kennedy said. “And it is an interesting biological fact that all of us have, in our veins the exact same percentage of salt in our blood that exists in the ocean, and, therefore, we have salt in our blood, in our sweat, in our tears. We are tied to the ocean. And when we go back to the sea, whether it is to sail or to watch it we are going back from whence we came.”

It was these words that led Ham to critique the company for purportedly promoting evolution, as he was heavily critical of the supposed themes presented in the spot.

“Don’t you just feel this ‘personal connection?’ After all, your ancestor came out of the sea and evolved by natural processes to produce you. Don’t you feel the connection?” Ham wrote on his Answers in Genesis blog. “Don’t you just want to go on one of their cruises so you can stand on the deck of a big cruise ship, look at the sea, and contemplate your accidental beginnings — and perhaps worship the sea, because it gave birth to you!” (Read more about what the creationist leader said HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.