Who’s Winning the Media Revolution?

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Rush Limbaugh seems to be taking credit for a media revolution, suggesting in a National Review article that he laid the groundwork for the success of conservative talk radio and the emergence of Fox News. Describing himself as “the only conservative voice in national broadcast media” at the time, Limbaugh fails to acknowledge the role of the legendary Reed Irvine, who founded Accuracy in Media (AIM) in 1969 and began the necessary process of undermining the credibility of the liberal print and broadcast media outlets. Reed is the pioneer who convinced the public to seek and accept alternatives to the national narrative that was being set by such figures as Walter Cronkite, thediscredited former CBS Evening News anchorman.

What Limbaugh calls “the destruction of the Left’s national-media monopoly” can be traced directly to the work of Reed Irvine and AIM.

But with the credibility of the liberal media in tatters, another threat to the public’s right to know has emerged—foreign television channels invading the U.S. media market with propaganda and disinformation.

While conservatives have made progress, the Russian and Chinese governments, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood, are buying their way into Western media markets, in order to confuse people and whitewash their own aggressive policies. They have become as much of a force to contend with as the old liberal media.

Even books and Hollywood films sold as entertainment are not immune. I was shocked to see Chinese government propaganda in the new Matt Damon film, “The Martian,” in which incompetent NASA administrators have to seek Chinese help to rescue one of their astronauts.

As Limbaugh notes, his national radio program began in New York City 28 years ago. By that point, Reed Irvine had been fighting liberal media bias for more than a decade. Under Reed Irvine, AIM used every vehicle to get the word out. These included the AIM Report, columns, “Media Monitor” radio commentaries, letters to the editor, national newspaper advertisements, films, television shows, and other projects. Reed popularized the idea of buying stock in media companies and attending their annual meetings to propose resolutions and ask questions that would embarrass the top brass. Reed conducted a multifaceted assault on liberal media bias.

Reed was the original media watchdog and AIM was the first national conservative-oriented media watchdog organization. I was fortunate to start working with Reed in 1978, when I became an AIM intern after college and was hired full-time, until his death in 2004.

When Reed passed away, I noted in a column that because of his work, the Big Media had lost much of their stature “and do not seem so big anymore.” Their loss of credibility was a testament to Reed’s successful efforts to tell the truth about them. It was this loss of credibility that led to the public demand for alternative sources of news and information. Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and others filled that void.

I joined AIM after graduating from college and completing a journalism training program at the National Journalism Center under conservative author and commentator M. Stanton Evans. Stan is another figure who has made the conservative media revolution possible. The National Journalism Center continues under the sponsorship of Young America’s Foundation, and its websitefeatures a quote from Sean Hannity about how the program continues to raise up a “new generation of conservative journalists.”

Limbaugh was in the right place at the right time, offering opinion and entertainment after the Fairness Doctrine had been eliminated, giving conservatives on the radio the opportunity to reflect and respond to the conservatives around the country who had been without a voice in the media. I salute Limbaugh’s success, even though I have had my own disagreements with his approach to certain matters over the years. Reed was always concerned about getting the facts right. He challenged conservative media when they were wrong, too.

Today, with the liberal media in decline, America’s foreign enemies have filled the void. It is an issue that is growing in importance.

Thanks go to the Reuters News Agency for conducting an investigation of a Communist Chinese radio network that spans four continents. The news agency has identified at least 34 radio stations, in more than a dozen countries, that are part of three networks controlled by what Reuters describes as a powerful but silent partner—state-run China Radio International (CRI). Fifteen of the stations are in the United States. Overall, Reuters determined that nearly three dozen stations were broadcasting content controlled by CRI.

Reuters reports that the stations run pro-China news segments on a range of topics. “The networks are structured in ways that cloak the Chinese government broadcaster’s involvement, which includes ownership interests,” Reuters reports. Their investigation examines the Chinese proxies behind the stations, and focuses on one of the stations, WCRW-AM, whose signal blankets Washington D.C.

Vladimir Putin’s television channel, Russia Today (RT), is also taking advantage of the media revolution. So is the Muslim Brotherhood channel, Al Jazeera. These foreign propaganda channels, in addition to another entity, China Central Television (CCTV), are saturating the U.S. media market with sophisticated English-language broadcasts.

Russia Today has published an unusual story featuring a string of ridiculous allegations against this writer. To cite one example, it points to a photo on a YouTube channel of my videos, explaining, “Cliff is pictured with three young people, two of whom are, like himself, armed with rifles, on its front page. Posed in what looks like an urban park, it’s unclear what exact message this is supposed to convey.” The photo is of my sons and me with shotguns at a shooting range. I considered it a nice family photo. Since the story is described as originating with “a team of authors working at RT,” this strange hit piece has to be something approved by the Kremlin.

RT is clearly concerned about my stories exposing Russian propaganda, but the blog posting also attacks my work exposing Al Jazeera. So it seems as though the foreign propaganda channels have to stick together. The story does note my continuing work for Accuracy in Media, “an influential press watchdog.”

From a legal standpoint, as we have reported on several different occasions, these foreign propaganda channels are evading the Foreign Agent Registration Act (FARA) requirements that their broadcasts be labeled on the air in the United States as foreign propaganda. FARA was originally passed to expose and label Nazi propaganda in the U.S. The Obama administration has not enforced the law, a decision that suggests that the foreign propaganda is viewed by some in the administration as welcome in the U.S. media market. Perhaps the administration views American media properties as things to be sold to the highest foreign bidder.

But with Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) now filing legislation to formally designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, Al Jazeera in particular could come in for more scrutiny. AIM has been calling for Congressional investigations of Al Jazeera’s links to the Muslim Brotherhood for years, but Congress has so far done nothing. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, refused to even respond to a letter from journalists, academics, Middle East experts and others asking for a hearing into the Al Gore sale of Current TV to Al Jazeera.

Action was taken, however, in Egypt. After the Obama administration and Al Jazeera helped foist a Muslim Brotherhood government on that Middle Eastern nation, anti-Al Jazeera posters appeared on the streets, saying, “A bullet kills a man, a lying camera kills a nation.” The Muslim Brotherhood government was overthrown by a popular military general, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, who is today the president of Egypt and fighting the terrorist menace. Al Jazeera has been outlawed as subversive.

Like Al Jazeera, Russia Today television represents a “lying camera,” which through such shows as “The Big Picture with Thom Hartmann,” promotes socialist presidential candidate Bernie Sanders to millions of Americans. I am convinced it was our decision to expose their alliance with “Bolshevik Bernie” that caused RT to turn its attention to the activities of AIM. It appears that RT doesn’t like to have its activities in the U.S. political process scrutinized.

Isn’t it newsworthy that Vladimir Putin’s TV channel is using a prominent “progressive” commentator like Thom Hartmann to promote a socialist for president of the U.S.? Hartmann describes himself as the number one progressive radio talk-show host in the U.S. His RT show reaches a potential audience of millions in this country.

While conservatives pursue a media revolution by building their audiences among grass-roots Americans fed up with the liberal media, liberals like Hartmann accept rubles from a regime known for murdering journalists who expose the KGB cabal running Russia. Putin, whose forces or surrogates shot down Malaysia Airline Flight MH17, killing nearly 300 people, is suspected of a role in the 2010 crash of a jetliner carrying Polish President Lech Kaczy?ski, who was leading a delegation of 94 Polish government officials, at Smolensk, Russia.

It’s fascinating that as the liberal media have begun to decline in importance and influence, the anti-American foreign propaganda channels have picked up the slack. The liberals were formidable opponents, but they were Americans. RT and Al Jazeera represent bloodthirsty enemies of everything in America that liberals and conservatives hold dear.

This is no time to pound our chests in pride over the media revolution. The battle has just begun.


The Pot Calling the Kettle Black?

By: T F Stern
T F Stern’s Rantings

Global Warming Communism poster

Reading the headline articles can be interesting and often times difficult to tell if it’s a legitimate item or if someone is pulling your leg.  Take this next item which came via the Associated Press for example; at first I thought it was a spoof piece like you’d find over at The Onion, it’s not…

The opening line of Michael Virtanen’s article reads:  “New York’s attorney general is examining statements by Exxon Mobil and Peabody Energy to determine whether they deceived investors about the causes and impacts of climate change, an official familiar with the investigations said Thursday.”

Where does reality end and fantasy take over when the topic involves Climate Change?

Exxon Mobil apparently had been mandated to warn investors about financial risks involved due to government regulations which may or may not be adversely affected because of government reports and subsequent regulations on the oil and gas industry.  Even so, the article included the company policy which showed they were at least in partial compliance if not complete subjugation to the powers that be.

“ExxonMobil’s nearly 40-year history of climate research that was conducted publicly in conjunction with the Department of Energy, academics and the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.”

ipcc-busted-logo2Let’s get this right; wouldn’t want to mislead anyone…The United Nations IPCC report, a report which has been proven to be based on fraudulent data gathered and edited in such a way as to intentionally mislead for the sole purpose of political power and redistribution of wealth on a planetary scale that rivals any con game…that report used by our own government to empower the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) into implementing Draconian measures which have nearly crippled the energy industry and have, for all intent and purpose declared that it will put the Coal Industry out of business…along with the Department of Energy and paid academics on the dole from the very same administration…these are the trusted folks with all the facts?  (Every now and then a good run on sentence makes more sense than following the rules)

It would seem Exxon Mobil is between a rock and a hard place, pardon the geological pun…  They’ve made efforts to get along with the self appointed ‘high priests’ in charge of the Church of Man Made Global Warming, implemented extreme measures to go along with mandates which were put in place for the sole purpose of putting Exxon Mobil and other oil exploration companies out of business and yet continue to exist and convince investors that the odds of making a return on those investments was/is worth the risk.

So who is being taken for a ride?   If the State of New York wants to investigate deceptive practices, “…to determine whether they deceived *investors (*substitute “the general public”) about the causes and impacts of climate change…”, shouldn’t they be looking at someone other than the oil companies who are only trying to stay in business and turn a profit?

Don’t take my word for it; recognized scientist and Professor John Christy, who was at one time on the Climate Alarmist Bandwagon, and former lead author of the IPCCwrote:

“Regarding the Hockey Stick of IPCC 2001 evidence now indicates, in my view, that an IPCC Lead Author working with a small cohort of scientists, misrepresented the temperature record of the past 1000 years by (a) promoting his own result as the best estimate, (b) neglecting studies that contradicted his, and (c) amputating another’s result so as to eliminate conflicting data and limit any serious attempt to expose the real uncertainties of these data.”

In lay terms, the IPCC Report is a fabrication, a fraudulent script intended to deceive in order to provide a means of redistributing power and money…in short, a lie!

Lamar Smith wrote in his article, The EPA’s Game of Secret Science, as originally found in the Wall Street Journal on July 30, 2013 and linked via the internet site JunkScience dot Com:

“As the Environmental Protection Agency moves forward with some of the most costly regulations in history, there needs to be greater transparency about the claimed benefits from these actions. Unfortunately, President Obama and the EPA have been unwilling to reveal to the American people the data they use to justify their multibillion-dollar regulatory agenda.”

“To cite a few examples of where the EPA would like to take the country, the agency is moving forward with strict new limits on ozone that by its own estimates will cost taxpayers $90 billion per year, which would make the regulation the most costly in history. Other examples include a Mercury and Air Toxics Standard for power plants (previously known as “Utility MACT”) that the EPA estimates could cost up to $10 billion a year. Yet more than 99% of the EPA’s health-based justifications for the rule are derived from scientific research that the EPA won’t reveal. Taxpayers are supposed to take on faith that EPA policy is backed by good science.”

But, hey, what’s a few billion dollars among friends?  It’s only the energy industry being destroyed and let’s face it, our ancestors lived comfortably in caves without electricity for a very long time.

Before the State of New York wastes even more taxpayer money chasing the White Rabbit down that hole perhaps they might refer to an article by the late Alan Caruba,  A History of the Disastrous Global Warming Hoax:

“It is the greatest deception in history and the extent of the damage has yet to be exposed and measured,” says Dr. Tim Ball in his new book, “The Deliberate Corruption of Climate Science”.


“Several UN conferences set in motion the hoax that is based on the assertion that carbon dioxide (CO2) was causing a dramatic surge in heating the Earth. IPCC reports have continued to spread this lie through their summaries for policy makers that influenced policies that have caused nations worldwide to spend billions to reduce and restrict CO2 emissions. Manmade climate change—called anthropogenic global warming—continues to be the message though mankind plays no role whatever.”

Those Big Bad Oil companies making a profit, all the while killing Mother Earth; polluting the water, the air and endangering our children’s future…shame on them for misleading investors, not telling them our government was trying to put them out of business, that the EPA and the United Nation’s band of thugs would lie in order to bring about a total collapse of capitalism.

T.F. SternThe Moral Lib­eral’s Senior Edi­tor, T.F. Stern,is a retired City of Hous­ton police offi­cer, self-employed lock­smith, and gifted polit­i­cal and social com­men­ta­tor. His pop­u­lar and insight­ful blog, T.F. Sterns Rant­i­ngs, has been up and at it since Jan­u­ary of 2005.


Clinton Scandals Threaten Her White House Run

By: Roger Aronoff
Accuracy in Media

While Republicans are deciding among themselves whether to open a separate investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email controversy, evidence keeps piling up that shows serious problems ahead for Mrs. Clinton. Yet the media continue feasting on what they perceive as turmoil in the GOP presidential race. When looked at objectively, Mrs. Clinton’s problems should prove far more consequential than anything facing the Republicans. And current polls reflect that problem.

The media are still basking in Hillary’s great October turnaround. Not only did she have what they considered to be a strong debate performance, but Vice President Joe Biden announced he wasn’t running for the presidency, and Hillary, they assure us, scored a big victory in the Benghazi hearings. Game over. The march to the White House can proceed unimpeded.

But a closer look at what should be very troubling issues to the media, and to Democrats who want a candidate without so much baggage, reveals much that they should be concerned about.

The latest batch of emails was released on October 30, revealing an additional 266 messages that are now “deemed classified, bringing to 666 the total number of messages so far,” as reported by The Washington Times, but ignored by most of the media. “One of the messages, sent by a State Department staffer, even labeled itself ‘confidential’ in the subject line to Mrs. Clinton, despite her insistence that none of the information should have been secret at the time. The email contained what the staffer called ‘a good report’ from a top German official who’d met with then-Serbian President Boris Tadic. All information gleaned from foreign governments is deemed classified.”

Other revelations from this latest drop included correspondence showing that in response to security concerns in Benghazi, Mrs. Clinton “made an effort to help evacuate the acting Libyan prime minister from Benghazi amid a crumbling security situation.” This was released about a week after her testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi that she had not seen some 600 requests from Libya that had to do with the security of American personnel, including Ambassador Chris Stevens, who died in the terrorist attack at the Special Mission Compound on September 11, 2012, in Benghazi. A case of misplaced priorities?

Remember, the FBI is investigating whether or not classified materials were mishandled on Mrs. Clinton’s private, unsecured email server. This occurred as a result of the Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCulloch III saying back in July that he had found four of Mrs. Clinton’s emails that were classified out of the first 40 he viewed, including one that was Top Secret.

It got worse. In August, “the scandal deepened, as Mr. McCullough sent a memo to the House and Senate intelligence committees that said two emails contained top secret information that was compartmentalized as Special Intelligence (SI) and Talent Keyhole (TK),” reported The Washington Times. “The two codes mean that the material came from communications intercepts of a foreign target and also from military spy satellites. Such data are considered the crown jewels of intelligence, for which access is greatly restricted.”

Rowan Scarborough, reporting for the Times, wrote that “Intelligence officials are aghast it sat in Mrs. Clinton’s at-home server, susceptible to hacking by adversaries such as China and Russia.

“‘SI information is not just top secret,’ said the former intelligence official,” adding that “it’s compartmented. It’s the highest level of classification you can get. It’s code word. It’s extremely sensitive.”

“‘You have a massive spill, a massive leak of classified information,’ the former official said. ‘The responsibility for that server is on Hillary Clinton directly.’”

Mrs. Clinton’s defense has changed from a complete denial: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material,” she said back in March of this year at her press conference at the United Nations.

Then, after two Obama-appointed IGs discovered classified material in her emails, she switched her story to saying that she didn’t knowingly send any classified material, and finally that she did not send or receive anything that was “marked as classified.”

But as former congressman and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee Pete Hoekstra (R-MI) wrote in a column for the New York Post, co-authored with Victoria Toensing, a former chief counsel for the Senate Intelligence Committee, “…that statement ignores how the process works. The reason government officials with security clearances are required to keep their correspondence on the appropriate government server is so the material can be vetted and classified prior to hitting ‘send’ to an uncleared recipient.”

Ron Fournier of the National Journal wrote a column entitled “Parsing Clinton: Deflection, Deception, and Untruths,” in which he said, “What Clinton doesn’t want you to know: Federal rules put the onus on government officials like the Secretary of State to protect classified material, even when it’s not marked as such. Government officials have been convicted of mishandling unmarked classified material. Any chain of events or excuses that led to the disclosure of these documents begins with Clinton’s decision to go rogue with government email.”

President Obama compounded matters when he told Steve Kroft on CBS’s 60 Minutes on October 11 that he didn’t know about Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was Secretary of State, and that he didn’t think it posed a national security problem. But back in March, after first saying that he learned about her use of a private server for all of her government emails “the same time everybody else learned it—through news reports,” he backtracked through his spokesman, Josh Earnest, saying he knew she used a private server some of the time, but didn’t know the full extent, or how it was set up.

Of course he knew. He had exchanged emails with her, emails which he is nowrefusing to hand over to the committee investigating Benghazi, raising further suspicions.

And when he told Kroft that “This is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered,” he was prejudging the case under investigation. This “angered” members of the FBI who are investigating Mrs. Clinton’s handling of classified material, and who spoke with The New York Times following President Obama’s comments. The Times also spoke with Ron Hosko, “a former senior F.B.I. official who retired in 2014 and is now the president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund,” who “said it was inappropriate for the president to ‘suggest what side of the investigation he is on’ when the F.B.I. is still investigating.

“‘Injecting politics into what is supposed to be a fact-finding inquiry leaves a foul taste in the F.B.I.’s mouth and makes them fear that no matter what they find, the Justice Department will take the president’s signal and not bring a case,’ said Mr. Hosko, who maintains close contact with current agents.”

This, along with recent news about a spin-off of the Clinton Foundation having to refile tax returns because in the earlier filings they had failed to disclose millions of dollars in foreign donations; and the obvious lies, inconsistencies and omissions from Hillary’s Benghazi testimony before the committee last month, are taking their toll.

When asked in the latest Quinnipiac poll, “Would you say that [Candidate] is honest and trustworthy or not?” when compared to all of the leading Republican candidates, Clinton was the lowest with just 36 percent who said yes, and the highest at 60 percent who said no. The poll shows that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) is currently ahead of her by 46 to 43 in a head to head match-up. Several others were beating her as well.

Even a slumping Bernie Sanders is reconsidering the “Get out of jail free” pass that he gave Mrs. Clinton during the one Democratic debate, when he said, “the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn e-mails.” He now says it’s a legitimate issue to pursue. “Let the investigation proceed unimpeded,” he told The Wall Street Journal.

The Democratic front-runner is under investigation by the FBI for her mishandling of classified information. There’s no doubt that she did. The only questions are, did she know at the time that classified material passed through her computer that it was classified? Should she have known? Does it matter whether she knew or not? What about the gross negligence aspect of not knowing? If the FBI refers the case to the Justice Department for a criminal referral, would Attorney General Loretta Lynch indict her, or would she turn to President Obama to get his okay on whether or not to indict? Is Joe Biden still waiting in the wings?


The Council Has Spoken!! Our Watcher’s Council Results – 11/06/15

The Watcher’s Council

Unsavory Agents: http://unsavoryagents.com/?projects=irs-eagle

Unsavory Agents: http://unsavoryagents.com/?projects=irs-eagle

The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.

There is a certain enthusiasm in liberty, that makes human nature rise above itself, in acts of bravery and heroism. – Alexander Hamilton

When the will defies fear, when duty throws the gauntlet down to fate, when honor scorns to compromise with death – that is heroism. – Robert Ingersoll

I had the good fortune and opportunity to come home and to tell the truth; many soldiers, like Pat Tillman… did not have that opportunity. The truth of war is not always easy. The truth is always more heroic than the hype. – Jessica Lynch

Sometimes even to live is an act of courage. – Lucius Annaeus Seneca, Roman Philosopher and Statesman


This week’s winning essay, The Noisy Room’s Harry’s Heroine Hikes 1,000 Miles For Wounded Troops… She’s An American Warrior All The Way [Video] is a story of heroism, of not giving in. Here’s a slice:

Meet Kirstie Ennis, one of the bravest Americans out there. Her story moved me to tears and I wanted to share it with you.

Kirstie is a 24 year-old Marine Corps veteran who toured in Afghanistan. Her life changed dramatically on June 23rd, 2012 when the massive Sikorsky CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter that she was riding on as the door gunner crashed. She survived, but woke up to a living nightmare that she almost didn’t make it through.

The butt of her gun went through her jaw and ripped it off. She was missing half her face and she was swallowing her teeth. All that happened when her 50-caliber machine gun smashed through the left side of the chopper when it crashed. Her legs and arms were crushed. Kirstie had brain and spinal damage. She thought she was going to die and that it was over for her. They don’t know why the helicopter crashed, but it was fast. When you fall at 150 ft. per second, there’s no time to wonder why. That was the day her career as a Marine ended. It was all she had wanted to do her whole life and now all she wanted to do was survive.

When she woke, she was choking on her own blood in her throat and nose. There was screaming. A medic told her not to close her eyes and stay with him. She knew that if she closed them, she would never open them again. They made it back to Camp Bastion and her long fight began. They really thought she would not make it, but Kirstie is a true Marine… a fighter and she hung on. She was so terrified, she kept throwing up on herself. She knew she would never be the same.

38 surgeries later, Kirstie has her life back. Her left leg has never been right and she lives in constant pain. The doctors wanted to amputate it below the knee this last summer, but Kirstie had one more thing to do before they did what needs to be done and they fit her with a more comfortable prosthetic. She strapped on a carbon-fiber leg brace and declared she was going for a 1,000 mile hike for Prince Harry’s Walking with the Wounded. She walked from Scotland to Britain and found in Prince Harry a kindred soul and a new lifelong friend.

Half a dozen wounded warriors made the trek. Kirstie was the only woman on the walk. She made the amazing journey, pain and all. And when she was done, she knew they would take her leg and she was cool with that. She just wants to get on with her life. It’s been three years since she almost died and they told her she would never walk again. Kirstie had other ideas and proved all of them wrong.

On losing her leg:

I can’t walk more than a quarter of a mile without it and I can’t run. My feeling is if this leg’s going to impede me then let’s get rid of it.

For me it’s about quality of life. I want to have kids one day and be able to run around the yard with them. Having this brace is a constant reminder of what I can’t do.

When I told my doctors I was not going to have the operation until later in the year they were pretty stunned, especially when I told them I was planning to walk 1,000 miles across Britain. It is the hardest thing I’ve done apart from my rehabilitation.

There have been four expeditions of Walking with the Wounded and Prince Harry has been on all of them. He really cares about veterans and I admire him a great deal. The expeditions have visited the North and South poles and Everest. Then there is this one that went from Scotland to Britain. The Walk of Britain has raised a great deal in public donations.

On this hike, the team was made up of British soldiers Stewart Hill, Matt Fisher, Alec Robotham and Scott Ransley, and American former serviceman Andrew Bement, along with Marine Kirstie Ennis. All of them are disabled in one way or another and received their injuries in the line of duty. All of them are incredible heroes and inspirational.

Kirstie looks wonderful these days. Blonde, tan and fit, the only signs that she was horribly injured are a scar on the left side of her face and her leg brace. She has never let being injured rule or destroy her life. She has had three years of intense rehabilitation and speech therapy. She had to learn to speak again. Now, she has a Masters in Business and Psychology. She’s also a stockbroker. She has a boyfriend named Brian, who is also a Marine who was horribly injured in a bomb blast. They’ve been together for a year.

Kirstie is an expert snowboarder and she was just named to the national team for paralympic swimming. She will compete in Prince Harry’s Invictus Games in 2016 for wounded servicemen and women in Orlando next spring:

Confirmation about the national team came through while I was walking with Prince Harry in Norfolk. Harry was really proud and very excited for me. He loves to see veterans excel and overcome their disabilities, that’s what drives him and you can really see that.

Harry met Kirstie at the Warrior Games in Colorado in 2013. Those games were the inspiration for his Invictus Games. They became fast friends on The Walk of Britain. Soldiers are instantly brothers and sisters… more than just friends in fox holes, they share a common bond from the battlefield:

He seems so engaged and committed. He wanted to know my story and I felt I could open up to him and that he really listened. It was just like walking with a friend, or a brother.

The military is a family in that respect. It’s a brotherhood. It really meant something to have Harry walk with us. There were no feelings of superiority. We spent two days together, one walking in Shropshire where we kicked a ball around with [former American football star] Dan Marino which was pretty surreal and another day walking in Norfolk which was so beautiful and very special. There were no cameras that day and I told Harry about my time at Camp Bastion because we were serving in the same place at the same time.

We talked about our shared love of aviation and I asked him when he knew he wanted to be a soldier.

He said from when he was a little boy and that it had always been his dream and that the military has been the greatest thing for him. I was the same when I was a kid. All my dolls were dressed in Marine Corps clothes.

He’s so down to earth and very easy to get along with and he fitted right in with the group, especially with Scott (Ransley) who is blind in his right eye. He’s also very kind and when people came up to say “hi” he made the time for them, especially the kids and you could see it really made their day.

Much more at the link.

In our non-Council category, the winner was Mike Adams at TownhallGet Out of My Class and Leave America submitted by Bookworm Room. Let’s just say that it’s astonishing that a college professor would have to make these points to students at a major university who are supposedly young adults.

Here are this week’s full results. Fausta and The Razor were unable to vote this week, but were not subject to the usual 2/3 vote penalty for not voting:

Council Winners:

Non-Council Winners:

See you next week!

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!

And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?