Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

8365NEWS -- 2013.11.16.Saturday

Expand Messages
  • James Martin
    Nov 16 6:44 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      1) Racism is alive and well -- Oprah Winfrey says Obama victim of racism
      2) Op-ed: Why I'm Still Angry
      3) Sen. Kirk Blocks Antigay Panel in Capitol Offices
      4) Illinois Catholic Bishop to Exorcise Spirit of Marriage Equality
      5) Bill Maher BLASTS selfish Christian hypocrites who don't tip waiters
      6) New Jersey Waitress Stiffed on $93 Bill for Perceived Lesbianism?
      7) Judge Refuses to Block Hawaii Marriage Equality
      8) Texas high school apologizes for misogynistic Christian speaker
      9) Jesus called; Kim answers
      10) Christian School Shores Up Anti-Gay Policy
      12) 60 Minutes' Benghazi 'Witness' Has Gone Into Hiding

      Oprah Winfrey says Obama victim of racism

      By Eric Pfeiffer Friday 15 November 2013The Sideshow
      [ Click on URL to watch the 04:42 minute video. ]

      Oprah Winfrey says that President Barack Obama has been the victim of racism and that the ongoing issue of prejudice is a generational one.

      “There is a level of disrespect for the office that occurs,” Winfrey said Friday in an interview with the BBC. "And that occurs in some cases and maybe even in many cases because he’s African American. There’s no question about that, and it’s the kind of thing that nobody ever says but everybody is thinking it.”

      Winfrey pointed to Republican Congressman Joe Wilson yelling "liar" during a 2009 speech Obama was giving to Congress.

      The interview was part of a promotional tour for the film “The Butler,” which tells the story of Cecil Gaines, an African American man who served as a White House butler for eight different presidents.

      Winfrey took her comments one step further, saying that the issue of racism is largely generational. Specifically, she said that cultural prejudice in the U.S. will largely recede after the last generation of individuals have died off.

      “I said this, you know, for apartheid South Africa, I said this for my own, you know, community in the South — there are still generations of people, older people, who were born and bred and marinated in it, in that prejudice and racism, and they just have to die," Winfrey said.

      However, Winfrey also made a point to note that there has been progress in race relations.

      "It would be foolish to not recognize that we have evolved in that we’re not still facing the same kind of terrorism against black people en masse as was displayed with the Scottsboro boys. It’s gotten better," she said. "… There are laws that have allowed us to progress beyond what we saw in the Scottsboro boys and beyond even the prejudice we see in 'The Butler.' "

      Nonetheless, Winfrey’s comments have been heavily criticized by the conservative media.

      Noel Sheppard, who is white, writes at the conservative media watchdog site NewsBusters: “Why do folks such as her only see racism through the prism of how blacks are treated? By looking at the problem so narrowly, doesn't it make matters worse?”

      And the website Right Scoop added, "Oprah Winfrey is going around the world telling everyone that Americans are racist."

      In August, Winfrey made headlines when she told Larry King she encounters racism, citing an incident at a store in Switzerland where a shop clerk refused to show her a purse that cost $38,000.

      "I'm in a store, and the person doesn't obviously know that I carry the black card and so they make an assessment based upon the way I look and who I am," later explained. "I didn't have anything that said, 'I have money.' I wasn't wearing a diamond stud. I didn't have a pocketbook. I didn't wear Louboutin shoes. I didn't have anything. ... You should be able to go in a store looking like whatever you look like and say, 'I'd like to see this.' That didn't happen."

      Don't miss the 25,533 Comments.  Racists are not happy. 
      My comment -- It will be good when all nasty people die.

      Op-ed: Why I'm Still Angry

      Why transgender people and their supporters should be unsatisfied with their representation in the news media.

      BY Rebecca Juro

      November 13 2013 12:48 AM ET

      Over the years, many people, both in and out of the trans community, have said to me “Becky, you're so negative ... you're always complaining about the losses and the failures, but you never celebrate our victories.” I'm told that I should be more positive; that we've come a long way since I first came out in the late '90s, and I should make more of an effort to find positive things to write about and talk about on my radio show.

      Perhaps those people are right, but they're also wrong. Here's why:

      When I came out as trans and began living as a woman full-time in 1997, it wasn't an easy time to be a trans person. The Internet was still in its infancy. With the exception of The Advocate and a few other gay-centric publications, there wasn't much media out there for anyone in the LGBT community, much less trans people specifically. What was available focused almost exclusively on gays and lesbians, and most of these media refused to give even a passing nod to the existence of trans people — that is, when they weren't bashing us or misappropriating our community martyrs like Brandon Teena as their own for perceived political gain.

      Finally, some trans people decided that we'd waited long enough for the mainstream gay media to recognize that we exist and are a part of this community, and so we started making our own media, by trans people, for trans people, and covering the topics and issues trans people actually care about most, not what some nontrans editor or producer thinks we should care about.

      I was one of those people. In the late '90s, before the advent of blogs, I created an email list called “Becky's List” where I presented op-eds and commentary I'd written about trans-relevant politics and other issues. A few years later, I teamed up with another trans woman to create and cohost Trans-Sister Radio, which was (I believe) the very first Internet radio show specifically focusing on trans people and the issues that matter most in our lives.

      It's been almost a decade and a half since I began doing this work, but the need for it hasn't lessened one bit over all those years. That is essentially why I’m still angry.

      Despite our political progress, our rising stock in media, the trans celebrities who have emerged, and the previously untold stories of discrimination that are now gaining attention, it's still rare to see a trans person presented in mainstream media in any form. And I don’t mean just as an average person, an activist, an expert, or authority in some field that has nothing to do with being trans. With very few exceptions, we're still relegated to the status of human-interest curiosity when we're not being completely ignored by the mainstream news media, and in some cases even by our own community’s media.

      Right-wing media like Fox News bash trans people with abandon, but their attacks on trans people generally go unnoticed and unreported by outlets that define themselves as progressive and LGBT-inclusive. The same biased reporting would not go unscrutinized if it targeted gay and lesbian subjects.

      What's worse is that there doesn't seem to be much interest in changing this reality. Mainstream media overflows with detailed analysis of every minor detail of the marriage movement, while even major developments in the fight for workplace equality (the issue most important to trans and most working-class LGB people) go underreported or even ignored by those same media, from which many of us get our news.

      Is it really any wonder that marriage has garnered so much political capital in Congress and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act hadn't even gotten a vote in the full Senate in 17 years until just last week? We're still waiting for major media figures who cover LGBT issues regularly, such as Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes, to cover the issues of transgender people. Even mainstream outlets that do focus on the entire LGBT community rarely staff transgender writers and editors.

      Is this really what our own community’s media defines as inclusion? Is this really what mainstream media defines as progressive and LGBT-inclusive?

      Trans people are not clowns, nor are we are not human-interest subjects or sensationalist fodder for MSNBC. We are no longer content to simply be ignored by those who claim to speak on our behalf in the mainstream in favor of focusing on those in wealthier and more politically popular segments of the LGBT population.

      Trans people share a common bond with those who, like ourselves, know what it is like to be attacked, vilified, and discriminated against simply because we're different. We expect those who carry the mantle of representing us in media to speak authentically on our issues, to present our views fairly, and not rely solely on those outside our community who have neither the education nor the lived experience to be able to discuss these issues from a first-person perspective.

      Hell yes, I'm still angry, and if you care about a fully inclusive LGBT and progressive media that actually presents the values it claims to embrace, you should be too. If we wouldn't stand for this kind of behavior if it came from a politician, why should we be any more tolerant when it comes from those in the media who go out of their way to say they're on our side?

      REBECCA JURO is a journalist and radio host. Her work has been published by The Bilerico Project, the Washington Blade, and Gay City News. The Rebecca Juro Show streams live Thursdays  from 7 to 10 p.m. Eastern.  http://beckyjuro.podomatic.com/ 


      Sen. Kirk Blocks Antigay Panel in Capitol Offices

      The Illinois Republican said he 'doesn't affiliate with groups that discriminate,' after blocking access to a meeting room for a group of right-wing activists hoping to convince U.S. lawmakers to adopt state-sanctioned homophobia.

      BY Sunnivie Brydum

      November 15 2013 1:45 PM ET

      A gathering of right-wing, antigay activists planning to preach to U.S. lawmakers about the perceived success of national anti-LGBT policies like Russia's so-called gay propaganda ban had to find a new meeting space after Republican senator Mark Kirk revoked the group's access to a Senate meeting room in the U.S. Capitol, reports BuzzFeed.

      The meeting was organized by the World Congress of Families, which has sent more than a dozen activists to Russia to support its recently enacted ban on "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relationships" in venues accessible to minors, according to the Human Rights Campaign. The meeting, originally scheduled to take place in a meeting room inside the Dirksen Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C., bears the title "Family Policy Lessons from Other Lands: What Should America Learn?" 

      When Kirk, an Illinois Republican who supports marriage equality and cosponsored the Employment Non-Discrimination Act in the Senate this year, heard about the scheduled meeting, his office canceled the group's access to the room, reports BuzzFeed. On Thursday night, a spokesman for Kirk's office told BuzzFeed, "Sen. Kirk doesn't affiliate with groups that discriminate." 

      HRC notes that the four-member panel leading the discussion includes three activists who recently traveled to Russia to meet with anti-LGBT lawmakers amid the nation's violent crackdown on LGBT identities. Right-wing activists Austin Ruse, Allan Carlson, and Steven Mosher all recently traveled to Russia, while the fourth panelist, Janice Crouse, openly celebrated a proposed law in Uganda that would impose the death penalty for certain instances of consensual same-sex sexual activity. 

      The World Congress of Families blasted Kirk's decision, emailing a statement to BuzzFeed saying, "Shame on you, Senator Kirk, for allowing vocal radical sexual minorities to drown out the voices of the natural family and faith that have made our nation free, prosperous, and stable for more than 200 years. ... Obviously Senator Kirk doesn’t care about families and children and freedom and has chosen to side with the policies of decline, death and disease promoted by the Sexual Radicals."

      Compiling a list of anti-LGBT statements each panelist has proudly made in the recent past, HRC commended Kirk's move and took aim at Republican Speaker of the House John Boehner for inviting the right-wingers to Capitol Hill in the first place and then securing them a different meeting space after Kirk blocked access to the first room. 

      "Speaker Boehner's embrace of these ambassadors of hate is shameful and despicable," said HRC president Chad Griffin in a statement Friday. "These individuals have supported the subhuman treatment of LGBT people around the world, and now they want to do the same here. The fact that the speaker would welcome a panelist who praised Uganda’s proposal to sentence gay people to death should shock the conscience of all Americans."


      Illinois Catholic Bishop to Exorcise Spirit of Marriage Equality

      Same-sex marriage comes from the devil, and therefore the new law merits an exorcism service, claims Bishop Thomas Paprocki.

      BY Trudy Ring

      November 15 2013 2:08 PM ET

      As Illinois governor Pat Quinn signs marriage equality into law next Wednesday, the Roman Catholic bishop in the state’s capital city will be offering “prayers of supplication and exorcism in reparation for the sin of same-sex marriage.”

      Bishop Thomas Paprocki of the diocese of Springfield will conduct the service from 4 to 5 p.m. that day at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception in Springfield, according to a diocesan press release.

      “The context for this prayer service may be understood by recalling the words of Pope Francis when he faced a similar situation as Archbishop of Buenos Aires in 2010,” Paprocki said in the release.

      That year, with Argentina about to approve marriage equality, the future pope said the move “may gravely harm the family” and originated with “the father of lies who wishes to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

      The devil is the “father of lies,” Paprocki said, and therefore “Pope Francis is saying that same-sex ‘marriage’ comes from the devil and should be condemned as such.” Paprocki also denounced Catholic politicians who support marriage equality, such as Gov. Quinn and Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.

      His words drew angry responses from LGBT Catholics. “The bishops across the country are getting their butts kicked over the gay marriage issue,” Joe Murray of the Rainbow Sash Movement told Chicago’s Windy City Times. “So you’ll see more stunts like this, and it’s going to make the church into a laughingstock. We’re not back in the Middle Ages. Exorcism is a sacred rite. It should not be used for a political end.”

      In October, Paprocki had called police to keep members of the Rainbow Sash Movement and anyone else identified as a marriage equality supporter from coming to Mass at the cathedral after the March on Springfield for Marriage Equality.

      Meanwhile, leaders of some other religious groups are welcoming marriage equality to Illinois. Rev. Martin Woulfe of the Abraham Lincoln Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Springfield will offer a public prayer of thanksgiving for the new law at 3:30 p.m. Wednesday, at a site to be announced. “As a bonus, he will be include a counter-exorcism blessing,” Woulfe wrote on the church’s Facebook page.

      Quinn will sign the marriage equality bill into law in a ceremony beginning at 3:30 p.m. that day at the University of Illinois at Chicago. The event is free and open to the public, but reservations are recommended; to register, click here.

      From HBO -- Absolutely priceless ---

      On Friday night, Bill Maher delivered a great New Rule blasting conservatives who call themselves Christians, and yet show themselves to be little more than selfish assholes, notably when it comes to tipping the wait staff.

      And finally, New Rule: It's OK if you don't want to feed the hungry, or heal the sick, or house the homeless.  Just don't say you're doing it for their own good.  Don't say you'd like to help people, but your hands are tied because if you did, it would cause a culture of dependency, or go against the Bible, or worst of all, rob them of their freedom... to be sick and hungry.

      Just admit you're selfish, and based on how little your beliefs mirror the actual teachings of Jesus, you might as well claim to worship Despicable Me.

      Now I bring this up, because last week new food stamp cuts went into effect, and Congressman Steve Fincher, a Republican from Dogpatch, justified the cuts by quoting the Bible — "The one who does not work shall not eat."  And it reminded me that I keep seeing stories in the news about Christians stiffing servers in restaurants.  Like the Applebee's waitress in Missouri who got this note from a church pastor.

      --- click on the URL to see the pictures and the 4 and 1/2 minute video ---
      --- don't miss the comments ---

      N.J. Waitress Stiffed on $93 Bill for Perceived Lesbianism?

      Thu, 2013-11-14 15:43
      [ click on the URL to see the receipt ]

      As a waitress for a good chunk of my 20s I learned to bite my tongue when old men called me “honey” or “sweetie,” or when folks offered the hackneyed advice to grow out my hair, but if what happened to Dayna Morales, a former Marine and waitress, had happened to me, I likely would have gone berserk and lost my job that day.

      Dayna, a server at Gallop Asian Bistro in Bridgewater, N.J., waited on a family with their two kids, who rang up a pretty hefty $93 bill, but rather than tip their server they left Dayna a nasty little note that read, “I’m sorry but I cannot tip because I don’t agree with your lifestyle and how you live your life,” according to the receipt Dayna posted on Have a Gay Day’s Facebook page.

      The mom in the family took issue with Dayna’s appearance from the start, Dayna wrote on Have a Gay Day, according to The Gaily Grind.

      “NEVER in a million years did I think this would happen,” Dayna wrote. “Not only was it a family with two kids, but as I introduce myself and tell them my name is Dayna - the mom proceeds to look at me and say "oh I thought you were gonna say your name is Dan. You sure surprised us!"

      She went on to express her outrage at the presumptuous, close-minded mother of two.

      “I am THOROUGHLY offended mad pissed off and hurt that THIS is what her kids will grow up learning and that I served in the Marines to keep ignorant people like them free,” Dayna wrote. “Sorry lady but I don't agree with YOUR lifestyle and the way you're raising your kids but you didn't see me throwing that in your face and giving you shitty service. Keep your damn mouth shut and pray we never cross paths again.”

      Since posting the nasty note on Facebook Dayna has received loads of positive support. “You all have put the BIGGEST smile on my face tonight and made me realize that there are more good people in the world than bad,” Dayna wrote on Facebook.

      Intolerance is a hell of an excuse to be a cheapskate. What would you have done if you received the tip that Dayna got?


      Judge Refuses to Block Hawaii Marriage Equality

      Circuit Court Judge Karl Sakamoto today declined to issue a restraining order to keep the state's new law from going into effect.

      BY Trudy Ring

      November 14 2013 5:00 PM ET

      A Hawaii judge today refused to issue a restraining order to block the state’s new marriage equality law from going into effect.

      Circuit Court Judge Karl Sakamoto said the state legislature has the power to define marriage, and the law, signed yesterday by Gov. Neil Abercrombie, will go into effect as planned December 2, the Honolulu Star-Advertiser reports. State representative Bob McDermott, who filed a suit challenging the law, had sought a temporary restraining order to prevent the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

      At the heart of McDermott’s argument is a constitutional amendment passed by voters in 1998, giving the legislature the authority to reserve marriage for opposite-sex couples, an amendment that rendered moot a 1990s court case that could have brought marriage equality to the island state then. McDermott contended that the amendment only allowed legislators to restrict marriage, not establish a different, more inclusive definition. But Sakamoto said lawmakers have the power to define marriage generally, independent of the amendment.

      “After all the legal complexities of the court’s analysis, the court will conclude that same-sex marriage in Hawaii is legal,” Sakamoto said, according to the Star-Advertiser.

      “I’m very pleased with the court’s ruling,” state attorney general David Louie told reporters. McDermott did not immediately say if he would appeal.


      Texas high school apologizes for misogynistic Christian speaker

      A Texas high school is apologizing after allowing a Christian extremist to deliver a disturbing, misogyny filled lecture on teen dating, leaving both parents and students outraged.

      Richardson High School Principal Charles Bruner and PTA President Elaine Mishler have both issued separate letters of apology after Justin Lookadoo, a faith-based motivational speaker, offended both students and parents while speaking about dating and relationships at two assemblies held on Wednesday, Nov. 13. at the public high school.

      Reports on Twitter say Lookadoo’s talk came across as "a rant against women." Several students are reported to have walked out of the assembly early, and others started a twitter campaign mocking the sexist and backward religious extremist with the hilarious #lookadouche hashtag.

      According to Justin Lookadoo’s rudateable.com website (“R. U. dateable”?), “dateable girls” should “know how to shut up,” are “soft” and “gentle,” aren’t “Miss Independent,” and remember that “God made guys as leaders,” and "Men of God are wild, not domesticated."

      Dr. Jaime Clark-Soles, mother of a Richardson High School student and a professor at Southern Methodist University, spoke for many parents and students: "I am extremely troubled by the fact that Richardson High School would bring in an 'expert' speaker who holds the dangerous, misogynistic views that advance a rape culture such as those expressed on his website."

      For more political news, information and humor see Left Coast Lucy on Facebook. For more news, information and humor relevant to atheists, freethinkers, and secular humanists, see Progressive Secular Humanist Examiner on Facebook. On Twitter follow Progressive Examiner.

      see also
      Again, don't miss the comments.
      from Heartstrong, 15 November 2013 ---
      Christian School Shores Up Anti-Gay Policy

      Eric Holder May Have Just Toppled the First Domino in Ending NSA Surveillance

      Philip Bump 2,836 Views Nov 15, 2013

      The top line news from an interview Attorney General Eric Holder gave to The Washington Post is that Holder recognizes Glenn Greenwald's work in exposing NSA — and Justice Department — surveillance as journalism and that he wouldn't be prosecuted. More important, is that Holder also supports reviewing past cases to inform defendants when evidence against them stemmed from that surveillance. That information could kick open the door to a Supreme Court challenge of the NSA's activity.

      Given Holder's personal history with the media (remember the AP phone records collection?), it's understandable that his comments about Greenwald would get some attention.

      “Unless information that has not come to my attention is presented to me, what I have indicated in my testimony before Congress is that any journalist who’s engaged in true journalistic activities is not going to be prosecuted by this Justice Department,” Holder said.

      “I certainly don’t agree with what Greenwald has done,” Holder continued, but journalism — even journalism flavored with activism — is not a reason to consider criminal charges. On Friday morning, The New York Times published an editorial raising concerns about how the British government is treading on that country's freedom of the press. Holder's statement distances him from that danger — but unlike his British peers, Holder is constrained by the First Amendment.

      But more important, the Justice Department is reviewing cases in which charges depended on information collected from NSA surveillance:

      “We have a review underway now,” Holder said. … “We will be examining cases that are in a variety of stages, and we will be, where appropriate, providing defendants with information that they should have so they can make their own determinations about how they want to react to it.”

      The importance of this lies in how the Supreme Court determines when it takes a case. Earlier this year, the Court dismissed a lawsuit filed by the ACLU and other groups because those groups couldn't demonstrate that they'd been surveilled under the NSA systems that they were contesting. A key component of the government's argument in that case, presented by Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, was that individuals who had been surveilled by the NSA were informed of that surveillance and could therefore file a lawsuit themselves. Given that there existed people with standing, the Court threw out the case.

      But it turned out that the Justice Department hadn't been informing defendants when it used that surveillance. In August, defendants in a case in Chicago were told that Foriegn Intelligence Surveillance Act evidence would be used against them, though the Post suggests that the first relevant example of being informed about surveillance evidence came last week. The ACLU's Jameel Jaffer, who argued the case that was dismissed, told the Post that "it was a 'big deal' that 'will undoubtedly set up a constitutional challenge to it.'"

      In other words, Holder may be facilitating, intentionally or not, the demise of the NSA's surveillance tools, if one of the informed defendants files a lawsuit and the Supreme Court finds that they violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches — a clear triumph for Edward Snowden and privacy advocates. At that point, Holder's opinion of Greenwald's work might change.

      Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments or send an email to the author at pbump@.... You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.

      Philip Bump https://twitter.com/pbump


      60 Minutes' Benghazi 'Witness' Has Gone Into Hiding

      By Philip Bump | The Atlantic Wire –  Thu, Nov 14, 2013

      Dylan Davies, the disgraced contractor at the center of 60 Minutes' retreat on its story about the terror attack in Benghazi last year, has gone into hiding. That leaves CBS standing alone in the spotlight of continuing critique over the controversial story.

      60 Minutes's October 27 report, since withdrawn, centered on Davies' tale of his actions that night: his sneaking into an Al Qaeda-controlled hospital, his striking a terrorist in the head with the butt of his rifle. As The New York Times and The Washington Post reported, Davies told both the FBI and his employer (contracting firm Blue Mountain Security) that he was never able to get to the diplomatic compound on the night of the attack.

      That inconsistency prompted CBS to rescind its story and Simon & Schuster, the CBS-owned publisher producing a book by Davies, to take it off the shelves. Shortly before it did so, Davies made it impossible for anyone to question him further about his claims: He vanished. The Daily Beast's Eli Lake reports:

      RELATED: The Benghazi Conspiracy Is Too Good a Story Not to Be Told

      Davies wrote that on Sunday November 3 at 4:00 am, he was hand-delivered a note to his home address in Wales that said, “Stop talking now or your wife and son will disappear.” In the email to [Simon & Schuster vice president Jennifer] Robinson, he went onto say, “Due to this threat I will not discuss the book with anyone under any circumstances for the foreseeable future, I am not prepared to put my family in danger. I stand by my story however I understand that it continues to be rubbished, which I expected.”

      This is his defense: having spoken truth to power, power is now fighting back.

      Unfortunately for CBS, Davies wasn't the only flawed part of its report. As McClatchy's Nancy Youssef reported on Wednesday, the original 60 Minutes report, from veteran reporter Lara Logan, included a number of errors unrelated to Davies's story.

      Logan claimed the attack was launched by Al Qaeda alone. According to Youssef's reporting, the attack included elements of Al Qaeda, Ansar al Shariah, and protestors angry about a video offensive to Islam. "Logan claimed that 'it’s now well established that the Americans were attacked by al Qaida in a well-planned assault.'," Youssef writes. "But al Qaida has never claimed responsibility for the attack, and the FBI, which is leading the U.S. investigation, has never named al Qaida as the sole perpetrator."

      The hospital into which Davies claimed he snuck was not under the control of Al Qaeda. According to Youssef, Ansar al Shariah — admittedly an extremist group, though not part of Al Qaeda — was guarding the hospital that night and preventing people from entering. Local residents denied that claim.

      RELATED: CBS Will Conduct a 'Journalistic Review' of Its Benghazi Story After All

      Logan named three suspects in the attack, none of whom are known to have participated. Youssef points out that Logan "did not explain the source of that assertion."

      Documents that CBS claimed to have found at the compound in October almost certainly weren't. Youssef outlines the evolution of the site's clean-up, which was largely completed earlier this summer.

      On Wednesday morning, Youssef reported that CBS was conducting an internal review of how the 60 Minutes segment was developed. Whether or not that review will include an assessment of Logan's impartiality in preparing the report isn't known. Earlier this week, multiple outlets noted a speech Logan presented shortly after the September 11, 2012, Benghazi attack, in which she railed against the administration's response. ("I hope to God that you are sending in your best clandestine warriors to exact revenge and let the world know that the United States will not be attacked on its own soil, its ambassadors will not be murdered..." Logan said.) On Monday, Gawker reported that Logan's husband is a defense contractor who worked for the Department of Defense on public relations at the height of the Iraq War.

      RELATED: Producer Fired for Rathergate Says Benghazi Story Pandered to Right Wing

      Among those that CBS won't be able to talk to about the development of the report, of course, is Dylan Davies. At least not until he emerges from hiding.

      This article was originally published at http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2013/11/60-minutes-benghazi-witness-has-gone-hiding/71608/

      Read more from The Atlantic Wire

      •   Benghazi Book Pulled from Shelves After '60 Minutes' Story Falls Apart

      •   '60 Minutes' Corrects Its Benghazi Story: 'We Are Very Sorry'

      My comment ---
      Nobody knows how to lie and bear false witness like a rightwing racist homophobic christian white boy.
      honest news ---> http://www.democracynow.org/ <--- Watch live at 5am Pacific; 8am Eastern Monday - Friday, or anytime on the net