Did HuffPost make editorial decisions that helped Gaddafi to maintain his grip on power --- thus positioning him to engage in the bloody barbarity he's now perpetrating against Libyan civilians?
The facts show that the answer to this question is an unequivocal "yes." And the facts are based on physical evidence that you will find nowhere else in the world.
On Feb. 22, 2011 this was HuffPost's screaming front page headline:
We couldn't help but notice several things about this headline. First, of all the pictures HuffPost could have chosen to depict the Libyan madman, it selected one of him at the United Nations, on September 23, 2009.
How do we know this --- and why is it significant? Because we gave HuffPost's "coverage" of the speeches at the U.N. that day quite an analysis, and revealed a very dramatic example of its endemic anti-Semitic bias. For it was on that day that two notable speeches were delivered:
- Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu gave a passionate, fact-based, point-by-point rebuttal to the most egregious libels to which the State of Israel, its military, and the Jewish people in general, have been subjected in recent years. Further, he outlined the basic standards that must be met before there can be peace between Israel and its neighbors; namely, for them to stop murdering Israeli citizens, kidnapping and murdering Israeli soldiers, etc. You know, totally unreasonable demands.
- Libyan dictator Moammar Gaddafi gave an incoherent, 95-minute rant, in which he vomited up innumerable conspiracy theories --- and even threw the U.N. charter on the floor.
As we documented in 9/24/09: HuffPost's blackout of Netanyahu's blockbuster speech at the U.N., HuffPost gave Gaddafi top-line coverage on its front page, and asked whether he made "valid points":
Notice that spiffy chestnut-colored outfit he's wearing --- it's the same one he's wearing in the photo HuffPost chose to use of him 18 months later, for its Feb. 22, 2011 headline.
And what kind of coverage did HuffPost give to Netanyahu's speech?
Here's a hint:
(h/t Jawa Report)
HuffPost completely ignored Netanyahu's speech. As we documented in meticulous detail, it gave not even a simple acknowledgment of his presence there, let alone anything he said. Zero.
On the bright side, HuffPost's crack team of 53 "editors" (or Arianna) decided that "news" stories about pressing global issues such as "Dogs in crazy outfits" and "Save the boobs" were far more important for its audience to be aware of on that day, and in the coming week:
So what does this all mean? Was Gaddafi a benevolent dictator 18 months ago, who deserved the benefit of the doubt by the largest blog/"news" site in the world --- but now, he's gone mad and has ordered his military to murder citizens?
Welcome to the reality you helped to create, HuffPost. Because if you would have given Gaddafi a fraction of the persistent, unending disdain that you pathologically show to Israel and Netanyahu, and the inflammatory libels to which you subject them on a regular basis, and stopped acting as a PR shill for murderous Islamists, perhaps the oppressed people in Libya could have risen up earlier, and had the moral support of others, before now.
As it is, your even asking whether Gaddafi made "valid points" during his insane screed --- while not even acknowledging Netanyahu's speech --- gave him a legitimacy he could not have paid for, and helped to sustain his grip on power.
Congratulations, HuffPost. It would appear that you are certainly having an influence on world affairs.
(At right: The corpses of Gaddafi's victims; he claims he'll "fight to the last bullet.")
Until February 5, 2011, the audience being subjected to HuffPost's malicious anti-Semitic, pro-Islamist bias was 24 million visitors per month. But on February 6, when Arianna became head of all AOL content --- including its "news" --- her audience grew by a factor of 12, to nearly 300 million people.
If you'd like to make your voice known, please consider writing to:
- HuffPost's senior management
- HuffPost's top advertisers