Olbermann trots out non-9/11 family member to claim 9/11 family members oppose rally against Islamic supremacist mega-mosque at Ground Zero

I tried to watch the video, but just the sound of olbermann's voice made me sick to my stomach.

LOL! Olbermann says we have a right to protest, but its insensitive.

That's funny considering Olbermann and many others on the left can't seem to grasp that conception when we say the EXACT same thing about building a mega-mosque on Ground Zero!

Hey, Olbermann, relax! The protest "insensitivity" will only last a few hours. But the mosque will last forever if you dhimmis get your way!

I agree completely that "Tool" is the perfect word to describe that guy.

Meanwhile, out on distant "planet Auster", it seems that Lawrence has managed his most intellectually absurd and dishonest response to the upcoming 9/11 rally to date.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/017220.html

Lawrence Auster starts off by feigning righteous indignation about Robert and Pamela referring to their rally as "theirs"....oh, the audacity!

Specifically, Auster's intellectual dishonesty is revealed in his carefully crafted statement:

"Have you ever seen people claim personal possession of a political event or of a political movement the way these two do?"

Well actually, speaking of the first part, yes Larry, people claim possession of political events all the time. Is it in any way an outlandish claim to refer to an event in which you provided the funds, upwards of $40,000.00 by Spencer's account, secured the permits, handled the security arrangements, booked the speakers and provided the necessary audio/visual support, as their's? I think not.

How much did Lawrence Auster pony up for this event, anyway?

The real intellectual dishonesty of Auster is contained in the second part of the aforementioned statement. Auster now creates a straw-man argument against Spencer and Geller, by deceptively trying to correlate a statement about a rally, "their's", to a possessive statement about a movement, the anti-mosque, anti-jihad, or what have you, to which neither Spencer nor Geller has ever laid claim to, as "theirs".

Auster goes on later to try to reaffirm his straw-man attack when he wrote:

"What's next? Perhaps Geller and Spencer will rename the anti-jihad movement "THE ROBERT SPENCER PAMELA GELLER ANTI-JIHAD MOVEMENT (all rights reserved)."

According to Auster, Spencer and Geller had already done that, as indicated by his first false statement. It's a childish attack and more importantly, completely false. I challenge Auster to try to substantiate his smear.

Awhile back, when I was critical of Auster, (to which he was none too pleased), calling him out on his all-talk-but-no-action stance, on what he refers to as, the Islam problem, Auster again proves my initial criticism correct, and unfortunately, and due primarilly to the most self-centered, and inane of reasons. He begins with:

"Prior to this, notwithstanding health issues, and notwithstanding Spencer and Geller's attacks on me (Geller has publicly and privately called me the moral equivalent of the leftist smear artist Charles Johnson, and Spencer has called me, among many other things, "the lowest form of character assassin"), I was planning to go to the rally, because of its importance, and because Geert Wilders will be speaking there."

Auster, in his response to my earlier criticism revealed, as far as I know, also for the first time publicly, that it was due to health reasons why he never attended any previous "anonymous" 9/11 anti-mosque rallys.

He reveals here, that in spite of those health issues, he was planning to attend in support of Geert Wilders. Good news, (although I do not believe that statement by Auster was genuine in any way), until the unthinkable happened. Spencer then referred to his and Pamela's organized rally as..."their's"!

Auster, in his continuing inane rambling, would have us believe that his support via his physical presence at the rally must be withdrawn because of some phantom anomaly, when he wrote:

"But when Geller and Spencer define the event as their event, that becomes impossible, especially when we remember Spencer's statement that he would walk out of any room in which I was present. Well, since he regards the rally as his personal territory, I certainly can't go."

You see, his attendence became "impossible" after that utterance by Spencer. Auster's spin would also have you believe that he is actually doing Spencer a favor, by not attending, although Auster's condescending sarcasm in this whole latter statement seems apparent to me. I wonder if he intended it?

The payoff line of course is:

"I do not go where I am not wanted."

This supports my argument that Auster's original claim that he was going to attend this rally, specifically in support of Wilders, was not genuine. What is interesting is that Auster's disdain is for the rally organizers laying claim to their own rally, which Auster finds audacious and narcissistic, but in the same post, can dismiss his support of the entire event, and underlying movement, for strictly personal and self-centered reasons, which to him, is completely acceptable and appropriate, when he wrote:

"I do not go where I am not wanted."

Auster's initial outrage on his post, besides being wholly illogical, is ripe with deceptive and spiteful emotion.

He later proceeds to undermine his own argument when he responds to a comment that he selected to publish, correcting the commenter by declaring:

"Because, obviously, he is the organizer of the rally. He's put it together. He's invited the speakers. You are not the organizer of the rally."

What Auster appears to be arguing currently, is actually unrelated to the criticism he puts forth. This is old baggage, recycled and presented as new from time to time by Auster. It appears to me, more and more, that talking tough about Islam, as Auster directs, is all that he requires. Actually showing up and doing something about it...well...Lawrence Auster would probably surmise:

"I do not go where I am not wanted."

Yes, I saw this last night.

Firstly, the SOIA protest does not begin until the moment of silence and reading of the names is over.

Further, the insistence that 9/11 remain completely "non-political" overlooks the plans for the vicious Imam Rauf and his Cordoba House's proposed dedication on the next 9/11—significantly on the 10th anniversary—and the fact that the horror of 9/11 was brought about by political Islam itself.

If this was the remembrance of some terrible accident or natural disaster, the demand that there be no political element might make sense—but 9/11 is *already* political, and if we don't want more the aims of the 9/11 Jihad terrorist attackers to prevail, we have to get political ourselves, rather than letting the Imam Raufs of the world continue to make us ever more "Shari'ah compliant".

I watch Olbermann from time to time for laughs only. Of course, one can watch him only so long before nausea begins to set in.

It's just another religion, man. Don't you get it? Ever since George Bush invaded Iraq everybody hates Muslims. Then the Tea Party comes along and is racist because they don't want to give health care to illegal aliens. The US wars cause all those Muslims to be terrorists, because they're desperate, man. And the Jewish settlers killed millions of helpless Palestinians, and George Bush let them get away with it. Muslims are victims of US imperialism and now the Pentagon wants to tap our phones and spy on us to protect us from terrorists they say are under our beds.

Is there a space ship large enough to accommodate all these slimy characters? Load em up ship em out...

I'm sorry to write this. David Paine. Is he really doing the right thing by his late younger brother? I think not. This is such a shame.

False representation.
So, it's wrong to protest the ideology that CAUSED 9/11 on the actual anniversary of the crime?

My only thought was since the event is being held on a Saturday, religious Jews will be procluded from attending.

I wish the event a huge success!

I notice Mr Paine said not one word regarding neither the cause nor the ideology behind the 9/11 attacks....9/11 should be a day of rememberance....but not for the reasons put out by the tools Olbermann and Paine..

and did Olbermann say Gettsyburg needed tourists?.....

You can tell the MSM will bring out their tool(s). It's disgusting. 9/11 happened. We were ALL traumatized. Each and every one of us. We will march. We tell those muslims to stop building a victory mosque near Ground Zero. Just how they have built in other places a mosque on top of temples, churchs, and other places of worship.

Wow did I miss Olberman's subtle remark about Paine or what? Paine did not lose his brother on 9/11, it was his "co-founder" who lost a brother. My mistake! I apologize.

Olberman makes me sick, he is the most arrogant, glib, sarcastic, America hater on TV. He needs an attitude adjustment such as boot camp at Parris Island, but I doubt the big wimp could cut it!
Semper Fi

Keith Olbermann? You mean THIS Keith Olbermann?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaJLbJDuAc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBrbCcOVDH4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvz9jyf4gUk

I think he is a role model for how Liberals engage in dialog.

Great fun. Anyway, Olbermann is pretty funny to watch with the sound turned off.