Peter Jennings is dead. May he rest in peace. Lest we forget, however, while he was alive, Peter Jennings did considerable damage to the cause of civilization and human decency by his sympathy for Jew-hating terrorists and their supporters.
This entry was posted on Monday, August 8th, 2005 at 1:09 pm and is filed under Horowitz Posts. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site. Edit this entry.
August 8th, 2005 at 1:25 pm edit
Gotta agree with you Dave. This guy was part of the problem, not the solution. He started out in the soft socialist-biased CBC many years ago (also state home of the multicults) and he kept the moral arrogance of that institution, but never achieved moral clarity himself.
He could have made a difference, but didn’t.
Sad.
August 8th, 2005 at 2:53 pm edit
Mr. Horowitz: I hope your political opponents wait more than a day following your death to start with the “lest we forget” summaries. You say “may he rest in peace,” but I doubt that’s what you’re thinking! Surely, out of respect for his family, you could have waited a bit. I’m not questioning the merits of your arguments, just the timing. Even in cyberspace, a period of mourning should be respected.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:34 pm edit
[…] using dead people in order to score a political point or two. Update: Loon David Horowitz adds to the parade of class: Lest we forget, however, while he was alive Peter Jennings did considera […]
August 8th, 2005 at 3:36 pm edit
Dear Grace,
I’m certain my political opponents won’t wait five seconds to dance on my grave. They probably will not, moreover, make a distinction between the person and the politics to say “rest in peace.”
Since this was not a personal attack on Jennings, but a reminder of who the public Peter Jennings was, I see no reason to withhold comment. It would be nice if we inhabited a world where people made the kind of distinctions you seem to be looking for. Unfortunately we don’t.
August 8th, 2005 at 3:38 pm edit
Actually,your team is already piling it on (see Oliver’s classy comment).
August 8th, 2005 at 3:55 pm edit
Peter Jennings’ onscreen persona was that of a smug, superior know-it-all. He evidenced a barely hidden smirk on his face in confronting any point of view not similar to his or his employers’. He wallowed in moral equivalency, and he brought one more new low to post-modern journalistic endeavors.
He expressed his first humanity in his reporting of the 911 attack. For this single efort, he gets no more than an honored boot on his grave — the same symbolic honor given Benedict Arnold for the wound he took before he betrayed America.
Jennings goes down in American history as another talking Canadian head for whom makeup and the right camera angle were paramount.
I won’t be a hypocrite and shed tears at his passing. I was revulsed by him when he was alive and am indifferent to him in death.
August 8th, 2005 at 5:00 pm edit
David,
At the risk of being chastised by the bleeding hearts who want to place a moratorium on all Jennings criticism, let me just say that Peter Jennings was an arabist quisling who symbolized the problems you outline in Unholy Alliance.
His terrorist ex-girlfriend, Ashawri, his overt bias in favor of islamic terrorists, his anti-Americanism, his willingness to distort the truth to please his leftist politics, the anti-Semitic/anti-American infomercial he gave on ABC every night, all of this makes him everything you accused him of and more.
May he rest in peace, yes, but one should not for one moment pretend that he was anything less than a subversive, pompous lefty who aided and abetted the enemies of America and Israel.
-MZ
August 8th, 2005 at 5:29 pm edit
I wish him well wherever he happens to go. The vast majority of the MSM don’t believe in anything, so I suppose that, in the minds of the leftist loonies, Mr. Jennings has dissolved into the nothingness from which all left-minded loonies sprang originally.
Bleeding hearts will chastise anyone who disagrees with them, so it’s better to say what you feel rather than try to spare their feelings. (Do they have feelings? Do they have hearts? - Doubtful)
August 8th, 2005 at 5:36 pm edit
Wow. I guess if they’re not with Faux “News,” they probably should die horrible deaths, then their bodies dragged through the streets until their entrails are strewn throughout the highway. Bleeding hearts? No, just sane.
ralphprice writes: “Do they have feelings? Do they have hearts?”
Look, man, liberals are the ones trying to take care of the downtrodden. You serve the wealthy 1%. Get your sh-t correct.
August 8th, 2005 at 6:09 pm edit
jahyarain, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but it is the leftist policies that create the downtrodden. Maybe you should take a look at the left’s so called “TRICKLE UP” economic policy. There is a reason organized crime uses it, and there is a reason the USSR was recognized as an organized crime syndicate.
August 8th, 2005 at 7:21 pm edit
jahyarain,
Not sure where you come from man, but you actually buy the stuff you are shoveling? The elitist left has forgotten about the poor in their hunger for power. You are too brainwashed for your own good.
August 8th, 2005 at 8:00 pm edit
It is none of my business, and I am not obliged to say, “rest in peace,” because I do not presume to know if he deserves to rest in peace.
Peter Jennings made his bed during this blink of an eye time on earth. Now is the time the following words manifest their profound meaning; “whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”
Peter Jennings, Voice of al-Jazeera? Relays Anti-U.S. Complaints
In my opinion, THE MAN IS NO GREAT LOSS TO PLANET EARTH, he will be judged accordingly!
P.S. Mr. Horowitz, God Bless you, say it the way it is, just because he’s dead does not make him sacrosanct!
P.P.S.
What the Rightminded think of Jennings!
August 8th, 2005 at 9:38 pm edit
Let him go down to “…the vile depths from which he has sprung, unwept, unhonored and unsung.”
Assholes that make the case of enemies of peace earn a place on my piss list. Tell me where he is buried.
August 8th, 2005 at 9:47 pm edit
jahyarain says: “Look, man, liberals are the ones trying to take care of the downtrodden.”
They should be, because they are the ones who created all of them. The problem is:
–”Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don’t mean to do harm– but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves.” –T. S. Eliot, The Cocktail Party, (London: Faber and Faber, 1974), p. 111.
Do you like all that importance you feel from all those downtrodden? Now shame the devil, and tell the truth, eh jahyarain!
August 8th, 2005 at 9:58 pm edit
jahyarain says: “Look, man, liberals are the ones trying to take care of the downtrodden.â€
Rightminded says: “They should be, because they are the ones who created all of them.”
——————̵- 1;
So, if we told all the downtrodden to go EFF THEMSELVES and kicked them in the teeth, they’d be saved? I LOOOOOOVE wingnut logic!
August 8th, 2005 at 10:14 pm edit
Horowitzisadouchebag says: “So, if we told all the downtrodden to go EFF THEMSELVES and kicked them in the teeth, they’d be saved? I LOOOOOOVE wingnut logic!”
No, that would make them more dependent on other people’s money! They would need dental work, and more of a reason for you to insist it be paid for them, so you will feel superior to the downtrodden!
August 8th, 2005 at 11:22 pm edit
Peter Jennings, a rare breed of useful idiot - one that was on TV every night.
August 8th, 2005 at 11:57 pm edit
Who’s up for a little grave dancing, boys? I’ll bring the scotch and cigars to help honor the poor leftist, quisling bum’s passing with a little Moonbat bash! Who’s got the pizza? Remember to tell them extra red sauce in honor of the fallen socialist commrade.
-MZ
August 8th, 2005 at 11:58 pm edit
We also should never forget that Peter Jennings was once married to Kati Morton, the author of Death in Jerusalem. Morton and Jennings later divorced and she eventually married Richard Holbrooke.
August 9th, 2005 at 12:06 am edit
“Because I presume that Peter Jennings felt that the Sandinista regime, which was a communist regime - no questions about it - were mere benign agrarian reformers … [Jennings] was a believer, was and is,” Collins explained.”
Jennings the “useful idiot,” with his Pro-Marxist Slant has blood all over him, and he took it with him to the grave!
August 9th, 2005 at 12:41 am edit
Death does not cleanse the rot. It just puts it away.
And the Haliburton contract was competitively bid.
Feather Merchants!
August 9th, 2005 at 1:23 am edit
David. No reason to wait to jump on this guy.
Jennings used his platform while reporing on 9/11 to dance on the bodies of the victims while he vehemently attacked President Bush and VP Cheney for their supposed lack of balls.
VACON
August 9th, 2005 at 2:20 am edit
Well, after reading all the comments and trackbacks(?), I realize that in my first comment I sound like a white-gloved, prissy Miss Manners. Silly me. But I must add this: (1) from extreme overuse, “douchebag” no longer holds water as an insult; and (2) don’t wear new shoes when you intend to dance on graves.
August 9th, 2005 at 8:30 am edit
David:
Three lasting impressions of Peter Jennings:
I often used portions of his ABC documentary on the 20th Century called “The Century” for high school class instruction. I also ask my students to examine portions of Jennings’ documentary in which his bias comes through. It takes them some time, but eventually they learn to detect the subtle and not so subtle biases in the documentary.
When Peter Jennings made a whirlwind tour of the States in search of America, the most memorable encounter occurred outside of Texas Stadium in Dallas. There a stern, strong-looking and tall Texan pointed directly at Jennings and said right to his face, “Sir, you are the problem.”
However, my most lasting impression occurred on September 11, 2001 when Jennings attacked the President for his lack of courage. Jennings apparently wanted a President who would run into a phone, rip open his shirt, toss on a cape, and soar into the sky shouting “here I am to save the day!” From that day on, I never again watched Jennings or ABC News.
When I heard of his lung cancer, I felt empathy on a basic, human level. Both my father and uncle died from smoking-related lung cancer. On an abstract level, Jennings was a cancer on the body politic and this was nature’s (or G-d’s) way of removing him from the scene. I would have preferred a resignation due to a Dan Rather-like act of journalistic fraud. But it was not to be …
The Troika are gone: Dan, Tom, and Jennings.
August 9th, 2005 at 9:17 am edit
You lefties need to read Tammy Bruce - proud lesbian and former President of the LA Chapter of NOW - on why, like so many of us, she went from Loony Lefty to (mostly) Reasoned Righty.
On the night that Nancy Reagan read her husband’s eloquent and tragic letter of farewell to the world (and announced his Alzheimers), Tammy (uber-Gay/Feminist Lefty at the time) got home and found a message on her answering machine from a “comrade” activist telling her that they had been keeping a special bottle of champagne just for such an occasion. He was rejoicing (”Woo Hoo!”) that Nancy Reagan (”Dragon Lady”) appeared to be suffering, and on the whole affair remarked, “There is a G-d after all!”
Disagreeing heartily with Reagan policies, Tammy nonetheless considered the Reagans to be decent people, and could not imagine that they would ever act so gleefully callous and cruel upon learning of anyone else’s personal tragedy, political opponent or not. She re-evaluated the true nature of her so-called friends, and came up with the only reasonable conclusion: they were self-absorbed, angry, dysfunctional, and cruelly self-righteous people.
She’s still to the left on important social issues, and she’s not a very good writer, to be honest. But her opinions are now reasoned, making her ultimate ejection from the ranks of the Loony Left certain.
To my Righty friends here at MBC: I agree with some that David’s post on Jennings is ill timed. As Tammy’s example shows, I think we must remember and demonstrate by example what sets us apart from those who betray common sense, decency, and basic civility. There will be plenty of time over the next couple of weeks to respond to the unabashed hyperbolized fawning over Jennings that is certain to spew forth from the MSM. Horowitz’ well-founded opinions could have indeed waited.
My mom expressed her sadness to me over Jennings’ passing. I told her I didn’t always agree with him, but he seemed like a nice man. She was sad about it, so I was respectful of her sadness.
orangeducks
August 9th, 2005 at 9:29 am edit
While I am sincerely saddened by the knowledge of any human being succumbing to cancer (I lost my mother to that dread disease 29 years ago), I am glad that Jennings never lived to see the destruction of Israel which he worked so hard to facilitate.
August 9th, 2005 at 10:43 am edit
What is so bad, so hate-worthy, of people that want you to have access to medical care, education, a home, better working conditions and salaries… THAT is what the left wants for Americans. It is pretty simple guys. How can you hate someone that wants to protect your rights?
Now of course the right confuses you with messages of false patriotism. To condemn a war that benefits nobody except the rich, costs thousands of lives, and has no reason to be, is converted into anti-Americanism by the right. You know that if most of you sat down and wrote what you think is fair, what people should have the right to in this country, you would realize that middle-class America, let it be left or right, agrees in most IMPORTANT issues.
But no, you guys insult a dead journalist because he did not think like you. You know he probably did. He had a family and the same worries as you or me. But he did think this war is stupid, that the true 9/11 assassins are the Arab royal family, that Bush was wrong to take us to war. You want to hate him for it? You think he should have died sooner for it? You are not a true American.
August 9th, 2005 at 11:03 am edit
American writes: “What is so bad, so hate-worthy, of people that want you to have access to medical care, education, a home, better working conditions and salaries… THAT is what the left wants for Americans.”
What is so “hate-worthy” about a group of people who wanted to bring “land, bread and peace” to the impoverished, long-suffering Russian people?
They called themselves “Bolsheviks.”
Oh, and like you, they also got their start by condemning a war that supposedly “benefited nobody but the rich” — World War I. And they claimed they would give everyone free medical care, free education, better working conditions, better housing and so forth.
The result of their altruistic actions?
The Bolsheviks and their ideological offspring in other countries ended up murdering more than one hundred million innocent people.
Let me repeat that figure: ONE HUNDRED MILLION
We’re just trying to keep you folks from pulling the same trick on us again. Once was enough.
August 9th, 2005 at 11:12 am edit
The logical conclusion to a life where the government guarantees you all the comforts is when the government decides it is time to turn you off.
I cannot speak for other conservative/libertarians, but I prefer the freedom to do for myself. I am denied that by a society where over 50% of income is taken away to be redistributed, with a healthy percentage taken off the top for expenses.
August 9th, 2005 at 11:17 am edit
“But he did think this war is stupid, that the true 9/11 assassins are the Arab royal family, that Bush was wrong to take us to war. You want to hate him for it?” -American
Actually, I’d like to know why an “objective” newsman, who anchors and directs the largest nightly news program, who should have no bias in his reporting of the news whatsoever, is openly advocating policy at all? You have just openly admitted that Jennings was indeed an antiwar leftist who disliked Bush’s policies, which is what we call being “hung by our own petard”, my naive, leftist preacher.
Jennings was indeed, by your own admission, a left wing propagandist who was justifiably roasted by those of us who saw through his ruse.
-MZ
August 9th, 2005 at 11:39 am edit
We have been noticed:
August 9th, 2005 at 1:05 pm edit
It seems no one is looking at the much bigger picture: ABC, Jennings’ station, is a company owned by the Walt Disney corporation, which is headed by Michael Eisner, A JEW. If Jennings is so vehemently anti-semitic, which some writers claim, wouldn’t Eisner have quietly done away with him? Another point: corporations are in business to make money for their shareholders. Obviously Jennings was making money for them, via advertising revenues. And lastly: How much influence could Jennings really have? A half-hour of news is now about 24 minutes, tops, due to advertising. And Jennings was there mostly to read the news and segue to other reporters, so his on-air time was perhaps 10 minutes a night. And because of this he’s the anti-Christ?!?
August 9th, 2005 at 1:16 pm edit
Richard, I posted a very well mannered comment on
“Media Matters” supported by anti-Israel quotes from the thread itself to prove David’s points have merit, but they deleted my post within minutes without explanation.
Interesting, isn’t it, that you allow dissent to be posted here, even engage them personally with polite but solid rebukes, and only expel them when their posts become excessively vulgar, repetetive, and/or off topic. Even then you give them advanced warnings with reasoning.
I guess they’re called the totalitarian left for a reason.
-MZ
August 9th, 2005 at 1:22 pm edit
Luisa, can you refute any of the numerous examples cited on this thread of Jennings’ arabist, anti-Semitic bias? You had better come up with more than your “Michael Eisner is a JEW” theory if you hope to be taken seriously at this forum.
-MZ
August 9th, 2005 at 5:55 pm edit
Another left wing talking head bites the dust!! Peter, I hope you rest in a better peace than you wished on the Israelites.
August 9th, 2005 at 6:56 pm edit
Richard Poe wrote:
What is so “hate-worthy†about a group of people who wanted to bring “land, bread and peace†to the impoverished, long-suffering Russian people?
They called themselves “Bolsheviks.â€
Oh, and like you, they also got their start by condemning a war that supposedly “benefited nobody but the rich†— World War I. And they claimed they would give everyone free medical care, free education, better working conditions, better housing and so forth.
The result of their altruistic actions?
The Bolsheviks and their ideological offspring in other countries ended up murdering more than one hundred million innocent people.
Let me repeat that figure: ONE HUNDRED MILLION
We’re just trying to keep you folks from pulling the same trick on us again. Once was enough.
__________________________________________________- ___
Richard,
Wouldn’t that rather be “one hundred million times was enough?”
August 9th, 2005 at 9:34 pm edit
jahyarain writes: “Look, man, liberals are the ones trying to take care of the downtrodden. You serve the wealthy 1%. Get your sh-t correct.”
So sorry to disappoint you. Do you recall the attempts to discredit George W. Bush in the 2004 election, “Billionaires for Bush” and the like? “You” so-called liberals have enough billionaires, millionaires and “filthy rich” of your own, and have had them for quite a long time, and I don’t ever see them taking care of the “downtrodden,” for the simple reason that postmodern liberalism CREATES and must perpetually maintain the “downtrodden class” even down unto the “lumpenproletariat” who frightened even your beloved Karl Marx.
Let’s make a deal - if liberals get rid of their intellectual incoherence, doublethink and kultursmog, we’ll get our sh-t right and sell it to you at a bargain basement price. In the meantime, go provoke a riot instead of offering genuine assistance and envisioning truly creative, proactive solutions to poverty, poor education and the like.
August 14th, 2005 at 1:19 am edit
Jennings rots in hell and good riddance.
He was another rich, marxist-coddling, Dan Rather wannabe as far as Im concerned - and part of the big treason industry that is somehow legal in the US.
I hope Lenin is giving him the business with a red hot pitchfork.
August 14th, 2005 at 1:19 am edit
Madzionist we also call em cowards for a reason too lol.
August 14th, 2005 at 3:39 pm edit
He may be gone, in fact, he’s gone for sure.
As far as “resting in peace”?
Not a chance.