It seems that the Afghan government learned something from their Soviet oppressors – it is easie to label those who demand their human rights as mentally ill than it is to allow unfettered freedom.

An Afghan man facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor said Wednesday.

Abdul Rahman, 41, has been charged with rejecting Islam, a crime under this country's Islamic laws. His trial started last week and he confessed to becoming a Christian 16 years ago. If convicted, he could be executed.

But prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari said questions have been raised about his mental fitness.

"We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person," he told The Associated Press.

Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai, said Rahman would undergo a psychological examination.

"Doctors must examine him," he said. "If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped."

It was not immediately clear when he would be examined or when the trial would resume. Authorities have barred attempts by the AP to see Rahman and he is not believed to have a lawyer.

A Western diplomat in Kabul and a human rights advocate — both of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter — said the government was desperately searching for a way to drop the case because of the reaction it has caused.

So declaring Christianity to be a mental illness is the way out? I don’t think so – though I am beginning to think that anyone who believes that Islam and human rights are compatible must be nuts.

Time to use the remaining US troops in Afghanistan to impose a secular government and constitution on Afghanistan, just as we did with Japan in 1945. Do we have a latter-day MacArthur to do the job?

UPDATE: It appears that the Afghan government is digging in on this matter.

"We in Afghanistan have the prosecutor who observes the law and the court that executes it. Whatever the court orders will be executed as the court is independent," said Mahaiuddin Baluch, a religious affairs adviser to President Hamid Karzai.

The case has raised alarm overseas and the United States and three other NATO allies with troops in Afghanistan on Tuesday urged respect for religious freedom. German Chancellor Angela Merkel added her voice to those of Western leaders expressing concern.

In response, Afghan Economy Minister Amin Farhang criticized the "heated and emotional reactions of German politicians" and said proposals there to withdraw German troops in protest amounted to blackmail against Karzai's government.
"We don't interfere in Germany's internal affairs or in running court cases," he told the Neue Osnabruecker Zeitung.

The case is sensitive for Karzai, who depends on foreign troops to battle Taliban and al Qaeda militants and foreign aid to support the economy. But he also has to consider the views of conservative proponents of Islamic law.

Asked about the international outcry, Baluch said: "Everybody has the right to express their view."

Mr. Bush – be prepared to use American forces to not only rescue Mr. Rahman, but to bring down the Karzai regime if it allows this trial to begin. American blood was spilled to liberate Afghanistan from the backwards laws of the Religion of Barbarism, not to reinforce sharia.

UPDATE 2: President Bush speaks – at last.

"We expect them to honor the universal principle of freedom," Bush said during a visit to Wheeling to talk about the war on terrorism.
"I'm troubled when I hear -- deeply troubled -- when I hear the fact that a person who has converted away from Islam may be held to account. That's not the universal application of the values that I talked about. I look forward to working with the government of that country to make sure that people are protected in their capacity to worship," Bush said.

I hope his words to the Afghans were even firmer.

MORE AT: Blogs for Bush, Michelle Malkin (taking the lead on the issue), Captain's Quarters, Church and State, Below the Beltway, Ordinary Everyday Christian, Conservative Political Rants, Macmind

Posted by: Greg at 01:48 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 725 words, total size 6 kb.

Sgt. Jason R. Lyon sprained his ankle in 2004, jumping off a Humvee in Iraq.

The US Army says he can perform any duty, military or civilian.

The US Postal Service says he is physically unfit to carry the mail.

While Sgt. Jason R. Lyon was serving with the Army in Iraq, he suffered a sprained ankle when he jumped off a Humvee. He also nearly had his head blown off by a roadside bomb that killed three of his friends.

After extensive medical treatment and physical therapy, military doctors have certified the Hamburg serviceman physically fit to return to combat duty in Iraq.
But the U.S. Postal Service says he is physically unfit to deliver mail.

"To me, it really seems unfair," said the National Guardsman, who was recently turned down for a postal carrier job because of the ankle injury he suffered in Baghdad in July 2004.

"The military says I can go to combat. I can march, run, fight in a war and do anything else a soldier can do. But the Postal Service says I'm not fit to deliver letters."

A frustrated Lyon, 28, spoke about his dilemma in his home Monday, showing a Buffalo News reporter his Purple Heart for wounds suffered later and a thick stack of medical reports from the Army, declaring him fully fit for military duty.
"Currently no limitations of military or civilian activity," a National Guard medical officer wrote in a report on Lyon last month.

A doctor for the Postal Service saw it differently, ruling that Lyon's ankle injury makes him unfit to be hired as a mail carrier. A physician for the Postal Service called the injury a "physical impairment" that would make it difficult for Lyon to walk or stand for long periods of time.

IÂ’m speechless beyond words at the absurdity of this decision by one doctor/bureaucrat who does not seem to realize that a sprained ankle is an injury that HEALS.

Not even congressional intervention has helped.

The office of Rep. Brian M. Higgins, D-Buffalo, has been trying to help Lyon in his dispute but without results. On March 11, Lyon got a letter from the Postal Service, saying a doctor for the service had refused to change her medical assessment.

Is it just me, or does this absurd and nonsensical slap at a veteran serve to reinforce the stereotype of the Post Office as an out-of-touch bureaucracy that needs to be eliminated so that private industry can do the job better and cheaper?

Posted by: Greg at 01:45 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 433 words, total size 3 kb.

A California surgeon has demonstrated that he places greater value on the lives of animals than he does on the lives of human beings, calling for the murder of medical researchers and other scientists whose work includes the use of animals as test subjects.

Dr. Jerry Vlasak is a trauma surgeon who is certified by The American Board of Surgery and is also listed as a Fellow in the American College of Surgeons. Vlasak is also an outspoken animal rights activist who has, in an interview published this month, repeated his view that killing animal researchers is an acceptable way to stop animal experiments.

In the March 2006 issue of Abolitionist-Online, Vlasak is quoted as saying "Killing an animal abuser, who is not an innocent bystander, is morally defensible, and if they had the power to do so, animals would do it."

Vlasak compares killing of animal researchers to stop animal experimentation to "the killing of Nazi concentration camp guards and officers to free the prisoners being taken to the gas chambers." He suggests that such actions, "most likely would have made the next crop of soldiers less likely to volunteer for duty."

"So yes, I think the threat of violence would save lives, innocent lives. I'm sorry to say its true," says Vlasak.

He proposes, researchers should be allowed to cease and desist peacefully prior to being violently forced. "All animal abusers should be politely asked to stop killing animals in their work and explain to them the scientific fraud in animal experimentation, as I was. If they refuse, they should be told to stop immediately, or suffer the consequences. If they still refuse, then they should be stopped by whatever means necessary. I would hope they would stop the torture and killing when asked, but I suspect some would not."

This man is clearly unfit to practice medicine. If he is willing to advocate for the killing of those with whom he disagrees on this philosophical point, how can we be certain that he will not show equal disregard for human life in the performance of his duties.

Contact the following to urge the suspension of Dr. Vlasak for this unprofessional conduct in violation of the Hippocratic Oath.

Medical Board of California
Central Complaint Unit
California toll-free line: 1-800-633-2322
Phone: (916) 263-2424 / Fax: (916) 263-2435
TDD: (916) 263-0935

Complaints should be mailed to:
Medical Board of California
Central Complaint Unit
1426 Howe Avenue, Suite 54
Sacramento, CA 95825-3236

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633

To send an Electronic Mail please visit:
http://www.govmail.ca.gov

Posted by: Greg at 01:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 444 words, total size 3 kb.

Concerned that the Catholic Church has too much influence on the Catholic Church, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors has demanded that the Catholic Church disregard the teachings and doctrine of the Catholic Church, and condemned the Catholic Church for attempting to impose those teachings and doctrines upon the Catholic Church. The Board also encouraged schism within the Church, urging the Archdiocese of San Francisco to defy the ecclesiastical authority of the Pope and Curia.

San Francisco elected officials, who have tangled with the Catholic Church before, issued a blistering statement Tuesday that calls on the Vatican to overturn its edict that children waiting to be adopted should not be placed with gays and lesbians.

The Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a nonbinding resolution that takes aim at a statement issued two weeks ago by Cardinal-elect William Levada, the former archbishop for San Francisco who now serves as second-in-command at the Vatican. Levada said Catholic agencies "should not place children for adoption in homosexual households.''

The San Francissco Board of Supervisors wasted little time chiming in, and challenged local church officials to defy the Vatican.

"It is an insult to all San Franciscans when a foreign country, like the Vatican, meddles with and attempts to negatively influence this great city's existing and established customs and traditions, such as the right of same-sex couples to adopt and care for children in need,'' the resolution stated.

On Monday, Maurice Healy, spokesman for the Archdiocese of San Francisco, told The Chronicle that adoptions into gay and lesbian households "are not in sync with church teaching, and we've committed ourselves to being in sync with church teaching.''

In other words, the city government in Sodom-by-the-Bay has gone on record condemning the Catholic Church for upholding two millennia of Christian moral teaching, and demanded that the Church change its teachings and policies to suit the government of San Francisco. Would someone care to explain to me the constitutional theory that allows for such a resolution? How can such a legislative enactment be valid under the First Amendment?

What is more shocking is that the resolution hearkens back to the rhetoric of anti-Catholic nativism from the 19th century. The reference to the Vatican as a foreign country contains in it an implicit challenge to the patriotism and loyalty of American Catholics, and was common in the writings and speeches of anti-Catholic groups such as the American Protective Association, Ku Klux Klan, Protestants and Others United for the Separation of Church and State (now known as Americans United for the Separation of Church and State) and the aptly-named Know-Nothing Party. The Board of Supervisors will be known and remembered by the company in which it has placed itself by this infamous action.

The Catholic League for Religious and Civil Liberties had this to say:

“In a non-binding resolution, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors lashed out at the Catholic Church because it disagrees with the Church’s teachings on marriage and sexuality. The board, which has long shown its affinity for the radical gay agenda, has now demonstrated that it has nothing but contempt for the First Amendment provisions on religious liberty and the establishment of religion. If they had it their way, the government would dictate the teachings of the Catholic Church.

“Because the Catholic Church supports the right of children to be raised by fathers and mothers, and not by various other combinations, the Board of Supervisors calls the Church’s teachings on adoption ‘hateful,’ ‘discriminatory,’ ‘insulting’ and ‘callous,’ adding that it ‘shows a level of insensitivity and ignorance.’ The group also said, ‘It is an insult to all San Franciscans when a foreign country, like the Vatican, meddles with…this city’s existing and established customs and traditions….’

“According to this logic, any religious entity that faithfully follows the tenets of its faith risks being condemned by San Francisco officials if the Board of Supervisors disagrees with its contents. The real meddlers, obviously, are government agents who seek to smash the principle of separation of church and state by seeking to inject themselves into the internal affairs of a world religion.
“The new San Francisco Archbishop, George Niederauer, has his hands full with a related matter: Catholic Charities, which has been told to stop gay adoptions, refuses to cooperate. Brian Cahill, the executive director, pledges no policy changes, and Glenn Motola, the CYO director of programs and services, is a gay adoptive father. These men worked for the former archbishop, William Levada, who is now a Cardinal-elect serving in Rome in the same post formerly held by Pope Benedict XVI.”

Well said.

RELATED ARTICLES AT: GOPBloggers, Mirror of Justice, Mere Comments, MarriageDebate.com, Voice from Eden

Posted by: Greg at 01:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 795 words, total size 6 kb.

How is it that CAIR, a group that will screech out its opposition to even the most mild criticism of Islam and proclaims that faith to be tolerant and civilized, can remain silent in the face of the prospect of the judicial murder of a convert from Islam to Christianity? Could it be that all the protestations that Islam is compatible with human freedom are nothing but disinformation designed to obscure the true nature of that faith?

What does the Council on American-Islamic Relations have to say about the trial of an Afghan Muslim who may get the death penalty for converting to Christianity? Nothing so far, noted a conservative, pro-family group.

"Ibrahim Hooper of the Council on American-Islamic Relations so far has been silent," the Family Research Council said in an email message on Tuesday.

"Hooper is usually quick to decry any anti-Muslim slight. By not speaking out against this outrageous action, CAIR is dealing with the issue," said FRC President Tony Perkins.

CAIR, in an email message of its own on Tuesday, did not mention the case of Abdul Rahman, who converted to Christianity 16 years ago. The judge hearing Rahman's case was quoted as saying that Rahman could face the death penalty if he refused to return to Islam.

Some of CAIR's leaders, along with other Muslims, met on Tuesday with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Karen Hughes and top officials of the National Security Council. But the meetings focused on outreach efforts to the Muslim world and "how to address growing levels of Islamophobia in the West," CAIR said.

CAIR recently launched a "Not in the Name of Islam" campaign, which seeks to distance Muslims from terrorism and "correct misperceptions of Islam."

I’ll tell you how to address the growing contempt for Islam (not fear of Islam – Islamophobia) in the West – get your fellow Muslims to act like civilized human beings, including the showing of respect for fundamental human rights like freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. Get “good Muslims” to start speaking out against human rights abusive, and counter things like this.

"I am a female medical student. Converting out of Islam is forbidden"

"In our law, a person who forsakes the religion should be killed and there is no freedom in this regard."

"To my secular Muslim brothers who are expressing their sympathy towards this man: these are the teachings of Islam, no negotiations in them." (H/T Big Pharaoh via Jawa Report)

Come on, CAIR – either your religion is one that allows for freedom and human rights, or it does not. Speak out and let the world know which it is – or don’t speak out, and implicitly concede which it is.

UPDATE -- Michelle Malkin provides this new link from the folks at CAIR -- and they appear to have done the right thing.

“Islamic scholars say the original rulings on apostasy were similar to those for treasonous acts in legal systems worldwide and do not apply to an individual's choice of religion. Islam advocates both freedom of religion and freedom of conscience, a position supported by verses in the Quran, Islam's revealed text, such as:

1) ‘If it had been the will of your Lord that all the people of the world should be believers, all the people of the earth would have believed! Would you then compel mankind against their will to believe?’ (10:99)
2) ‘(O Prophet) proclaim: 'This is the Truth from your Lord. Now let him who will, believe in it, and him who will, deny it.'’ (18:29)
3) ‘If they turn away from thee (O Muhammad) they should know that We have not sent you to be their keeper. Your only duty is to convey My message.’ (42:4
4) ‘Let there be no compulsion in religion.’ (2:256)

“Religious decisions should be matters of personal choice, not a cause for state intervention. Faith imposed by force is not true belief, but coercion. Islam has no need to compel belief in its divine truth. As the Quran states: ‘Truth stands out clear from error. Therefore, whoever rejects evil and believes in God has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks.’ (2:256)

“We urge the government of Afghanistan to order the immediate release of Mr. Abdul Rahman.”

Before issuing its statement, CAIR consulted with members of the Fiqh Council of North America, an association of Islamic legal scholars that interprets Muslim religious law.

I'm pleased to see this statement.

Posted by: Greg at 01:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 770 words, total size 5 kb.

After Rita and Katrina, folks down here do not want to see any more major tropical weather systems coming to Houston.

The Texas coast from Corpus Christi to the Louisiana border is likely to be the target of higher than normal hurricane activity over the next 10 years, private forecaster AccuWeather said today.

The 2006 hurricane season will be more active than normal and could bring a devastating storm to the U.S. Northeast also, the forecast said.

The outlook comes after the most costly hurricane season on record in 2005, with storms crippling New Orleans and other parts of the U.S. Gulf Coast and briefly knocking out a quarter of domestic fuel production.

* * *

Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans and the Mississippi coast last August with winds above 135 mph and a 30-foot-high storm surge, causing more than $60 billion in damage.

Katrina was followed by Hurricanes Rita in Texas and Wilma in Florida. Each wreaked more than $10 billion of insured losses, making 2005 the most expensive year for hurricanes ever.

Bastardi said this year's storm activity will be above normal, but could be less active than 2005.

Forecasters are looking for a big storm to hit the Northeast this year. I don’t like the sound of that – but please, not Houston! One evacuation is enough.

Posted by: Greg at 01:20 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 226 words, total size 1 kb.

I hope the state or federal government intervenes to take control of this lawless situation.

At a time when communities across the nation are considering efforts to crack down on illegal immigration, one small city south of downtown Los Angeles is charting a different course.

In Maywood, where 96% of the residents are Latino, and more than half are foreign-born, the City Council has vowed to make the municipality a "sanctuary city" for illegal immigrants, and over the last few months it has set out to prove it.
First, the city eliminated the Police Department's traffic division after complaints that officers unfairly targeted illegal immigrants. Then it made it much more difficult for police to tow cars whose owners didn't have driver's licenses, a practice that affected mostly undocumented people who could not obtain licenses.

In January, the City Council passed a resolution opposing a proposed federal law that would criminalize illegal immigration and make local police departments enforce immigration law. Now, some in the community are pushing to rename one of the city's elementary schools after former Mexican President Benito Juarez and debating measures to improve the lives of illegal immigrants.

Maywood leaders say they hope their actions will serve as a counterpoint to other cities, such as Costa Mesa in Orange County, that have moved forward with crackdowns on illegal immigrants and groups like the Minutemen border patrols.

"You just couldn't keep quiet. I think we needed to amplify the debate by saying that no human being is illegal," said Councilman Felipe Aguirre, 53. "These people are here Â… making your clothes, shining your shoes and taking care of your kids. And now you want to develop this hypocritical policy?"

Someone needs to tell this idiot that even if we accept his logic that no human beings are illegal, the actions of human beings can be – including illegally entering, residing, and working in the United States.

Posted by: Greg at 01:20 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 329 words, total size 2 kb.

I wish more folks would make this point about higher education today – athletics has come to outweigh academics and research.

Nobel Prize-winning physicist Carl Wieman announced Monday that he is leaving the University of Colorado and blasted the school, saying it stresses athletics over academics.

Wieman will leave CU in January for the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, where he will head a $10.6 million science education project.

He will retain a 20 percent appointment at CU to lead the Science Education Project there, funded with $5 million during the next five years.

Wieman, 54, said at a news conference that the Canadian funding offer was the main reason for his departure from CU after 22 years.

But afterward, he said CU regents' and administrators' preoccupation with athletics contributed to his decision.

"If you want to have any sort of large-scale education initiative, where you're really focusing on education, you need people at the highest levels to put thought and attention into it," he said.

"If our Board of Regents spent half the time on discussions of how to improve the education for students that they do on athletics, it would be a very different university," Wieman said.

The recent CU football recruiting controversy was a major distraction that diverted attention from the classroom, Wieman said.

"My personal view is that there's a considerable overemphasis (on athletics) that takes time and attention away from what we could be doing to improve education."

As a high school teacher, I’ve seen the same thing happen on my level. When discussing decisions about scheduling for next year, one administrator admitted that it be difficult get rid of the block schedule because of objections from the football and basketball coaches and their associate booster clubs. Guess what? We are almost certainly keeping block scheduling. When it came to a decision on splitting our 3500 student school into two schools or keeping it as one entity, the possibility that one or both schools would become a 4A school was a serious point of discussion, as well as the relative competitive disadvantage the smaller schools would have in 5A. Never mind that the bulk of the educational research shows that the opposite decision would have been preferable in both cases – if the first consideration was the best outcome for students.

When will we go back to allowing schools to put education first?

Posted by: Greg at 01:14 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 419 words, total size 3 kb.

But who will supply his voice?

Contrary to popular assumption, "South Park" fans have not seen the Chef sling his final serving of hash.

The character, who until last week was voiced by Isaac Hayes, is back tomorrow in the first of several new episodes of Comedy Central's top-rated show.

The episode, "The Return of Chef" (10 p.m.), has the school-cafeteria cook returning after a hiatus to the bucolic town that Stan, Kyle, Kenny and Cartman call home. According to a brief description released by the network, the gang is happy "to have their old friend back, [but] they notice that something about Chef seems different. When Chef's strange behavior starts getting him in trouble, the boys pull out all the stops to save him."

Work on the episode began last week, after news broke of Hayes' decision to quit the show because it skewered the Church of Scientology, of which he's a member.

"There is a time when satire ends and intolerance and bigotry toward religious beliefs and others begins," Hayes, 63, said in a statement last week.

A Comedy Central spokesman would not confirm or deny that Chef's voice in tomorrow's episode is provided by Hayes, but he did reiterate that Hayes is no longer involved with the show. However, it would not be difficult to weave together existing dialogue from Hayes. And it is not unusual for Parker and Stone to deliver episodes at the last minute.

It's unclear whether tomorrow's episode involves Scientology.

But Parker and Stone's penchant for topical sacred-cow-bashing is well-known. So it would not be a stretch to assume that "Chef Returns" is the latest salvo in the battle between "South Park" and the religion that counts Tom Cruise and John Travolta among its devotees.

I cannot see the show getting rid of Chef – but I suppose there are a number of other voices who could fill the role nicely.

So tell me – whose voice do you think we will hear coming out of Chef’s mouth? Tell me in comments.

Posted by: Greg at 01:12 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 344 words, total size 2 kb.

Would that we could get rid of every newspaper editor and publisher who refused to run the most newsworthy cartoons of the 21st century, and everyu politician who condemned the publication of those images of Islam's false prophet. This Swedish Censor is a good start.

Sweden's foreign minister on Tuesday stepped down because of her role in the row over the Prophet Mohammad cartoons.

Social Democrat Laila Freivalds had to admit she knew that her ministry shut down a right-wing Web site that published Mohammad cartoons, according to the Stockholm bureau of the German daily Handelsblatt.

Freivalds on Tuesday said she could no longer do "serious foreign policy," and handed in her resignation.

The Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet had reported earlier that a high-ranking foreign ministry official pressured the Web site's operators to shut down the page. Freivalds had initially claimed she knew nothing of the operation but later had to admit she had been informed.

A government official in a democratic society should have shut down the censorship effort, not the website. I can only hope that the next step is the firing of every government employee who was involved in this unconscionable violation of human rights. After all, we in the West do understand the concept of human rights, even if the Religion of Barbarism does not.

Posted by: Greg at 01:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 235 words, total size 2 kb.

Illinois Democrats have been tainted with the stench of corruption back to at least the days of Stephen Douglas. One county Democrat party, though, claims to be seeking to change that.

St. Clair County Democratic leadership has distributed election packets to countywide precinct committeemen, which include an affidavit stating that money from the party will not be used to buy votes.

The unusual action follows the vote buying convictions in June of five East St. Louis politicians. They had helped distribute more than $70,000 received by city Democratic precinct committeemen two days before the 2004 election from the county Democratic organization.

While St. Clair County Democratic Central Committee Chairman Robert Sprague could not be reached for comment, a fax received Monday from his Belleville law office included these documents given to precinct committeemen countywide for today's primary election:

• A one-page letter from Sprague warning that money from the county committee should be used only to pay to help get the vote out, including paying workers to canvass the precincts, for advertisements and to provide transportation to needy voters. The letter also advised that precinct leaders should "keep a record of all expenses" and "under no circumstances" use party money to pay for votes.

• An "affidavit," with room for a notary's signature, stating that a committeeman or election worker swears that no party money will be used "in violation of any federal, state or local laws or regulations."

• A one-page photocopy titled "Election Crimes" that outlined federal voting laws.

I donÂ’t buy this for a minute, given my experiences of working elections in St. Clair County. I remember an incident during one campaign in which a guy with our opponentÂ’s campaign told us within 30 votes how many votes we would be up prior to the announcement of the votes from East St. Louis and down after those votes came in. As recent convictions of prominent county Democrats show, the corruption continues.

Which leads us to this further Democrat commentary.

Sprague's letter to the committeemen also refers to "recent efforts by the Republicans and their friends to suppress the vote of Democrats in St. Clair County..." No further explanation was offered as to whether this referred to last year's federal vote fraud prosecution under a U.S. attorney appointed by a Republican president, or whether local Republicans were suppressing Democratic voters.

My interpretation is that Sprague is concerned that the feds are not allowing corruption as usual to continue in St. Clair County. As a result, IÂ’m willing to bet that the other protestations that vote buying is prohibited are not worth the paper they are printed on.

But then again, if the St. Clair County Democrats had any integrity to begin with, the memo would never have been necessary.

Posted by: Greg at 01:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 479 words, total size 3 kb.

The moonbats are up in arms over the decision of washingtonpost.com (the online wing of the Washington Post) to include a blog by RedState.com founder Ben Domenech

During the recent controversy surrounding Dan Froomkin's blog at The Washington Post, editors not only decided to clearly label his column "opinion" but also to make an effort to hire a conservative blogger to balance his alleged liberal slant.

Today, the Post launched the result: A new blog called "Red America," created by Ben Domenech, co-founder of RedState, a popular community blog.

It immediately set off what Post political reporter Tom Edsall called a "firestorm" in his online chat today.

A former contributing editor to National Review Online, Domenech later became what he calls "the youngest political appointee of President George W. Bush." After a stint as chief speechwriter for Texas Senator John Cornyn, he became a book editor at Regnery Publishing, where he worked with Michelle Malkin and others.

* * *

The launch upstaged what the Post's Edsall had hoped to talk about during his online chat today. Here is a selection of the exchanges there.

So the decision to balance liberal writers at washingtonpost.com has provoked a howl of outrage from liberals, who donÂ’t believe that equal time is warranted. WhatÂ’s more, they seem to think that they are the oppressed minority at the Washington Post, and want the post to hire a liberal blogger to offset Domenech (who was hired to balance liberal Dan Froomkin). I guess it isnÂ’t equal time for liberals until the balance is tilted to the hard Left.

Posted by: Greg at 01:07 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

It is not an unreasonable question, given their decision to traffic with the enemy during time of war.

Our readers have reacted with outrage to our report that NBC News secretly interviewed a Taliban terrorist in Afghanistan, "Commander Ismail," who kills U.S. military personnel. We asked: What's next? Exclusive footage of American troops being massacred while NBC News and Commander Ismail look on and film it for the evening news?

One reader responded: "Just wanted to thank you for the report about NBC and their seditious and treasonous acts. There can be no doubt that the big media outlets in this country have tried their best to undermine this country and this President at every turn…The New York Times should be tried under the treason and sedition laws for their part in aiding and abetting the terrorist in revealing the NSA wiretapping program. These traitors have weakened this country's defense, [they] triumph the rights of the terrorist bastard scum and blame President Bush for everything under the sun. They will stoop to ever deepening lows as evidenced by the childish and hateful behavior towards the President and the First Lady at Mrs. King's funeral. There is no bottom to the pit these snakes come from. Keep up the great work."

Read what else Cliff Kincaid’s readers have to say on the matter – it isn’t pretty.

Posted by: Greg at 01:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 231 words, total size 1 kb.

It is not an unreasonable question, given their decision to traffic with the enemy during time of war.

Our readers have reacted with outrage to our report that NBC News secretly interviewed a Taliban terrorist in Afghanistan, "Commander Ismail," who kills U.S. military personnel. We asked: What's next? Exclusive footage of American troops being massacred while NBC News and Commander Ismail look on and film it for the evening news?

One reader responded: "Just wanted to thank you for the report about NBC and their seditious and treasonous acts. There can be no doubt that the big media outlets in this country have tried their best to undermine this country and this President at every turnÂ…The New York Times should be tried under the treason and sedition laws for their part in aiding and abetting the terrorist in revealing the NSA wiretapping program. These traitors have weakened this country's defense, [they] triumph the rights of the terrorist bastard scum and blame President Bush for everything under the sun. They will stoop to ever deepening lows as evidenced by the childish and hateful behavior towards the President and the First Lady at Mrs. King's funeral. There is no bottom to the pit these snakes come from. Keep up the great work."

Read what else Cliff Kincaid’s readers have to say on the matter – it isn’t pretty.

Posted by: Greg at 01:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 237 words, total size 2 kb.

This just in from Crete, 500 BC.

A 2,500-year-old sarcophagus with vivid color illustrations from Homer's epics has been discovered in western Cyprus, archaeologists said Monday.

Construction workers found the limestone sarcophagus last week in a tomb near the village of Kouklia, in the coastal Paphos area. The tomb, which probably belonged to an ancient warrior, had been looted during antiquity.

"The style of the decoration is unique, not so much from an artistic point of view, but for the subject and the colors used," said Pavlos Flourentzos, director of the island's antiquities department.

Only two similar sarcophagi have ever been discovered in Cyprus before. One is housed in New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art and the other in the British Museum in London, but their colors are more faded, Flourentzos said.

Flourentzos said the coffin -- painted in red, black and blue on a white background -- dated to 500 B.C., when Greek cultural influence was gaining a firm hold on the eastern Mediterranean island. Pottery discovered in the tomb is expected to provide a more precise date.

Experts believe the ornate decoration features the hero Ulysses in scenes from Homer's Iliad and Odyssey -- both hugely popular throughout the Greek world.
In one large painting, Ulysses and his comrades escape from the blind Cyclops Polyphemos' cave, hidden under a flock of sheep. Another depicts a battle between Greeks and Trojans from the Iliad.

Go look at the picture.

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 246 words, total size 2 kb.

This just in from Crete, 500 BC.

A 2,500-year-old sarcophagus with vivid color illustrations from Homer's epics has been discovered in western Cyprus, archaeologists said Monday.

Construction workers found the limestone sarcophagus last week in a tomb near the village of Kouklia, in the coastal Paphos area. The tomb, which probably belonged to an ancient warrior, had been looted during antiquity.

"The style of the decoration is unique, not so much from an artistic point of view, but for the subject and the colors used," said Pavlos Flourentzos, director of the island's antiquities department.

Only two similar sarcophagi have ever been discovered in Cyprus before. One is housed in New York's Metropolitan Museum of Art and the other in the British Museum in London, but their colors are more faded, Flourentzos said.

Flourentzos said the coffin -- painted in red, black and blue on a white background -- dated to 500 B.C., when Greek cultural influence was gaining a firm hold on the eastern Mediterranean island. Pottery discovered in the tomb is expected to provide a more precise date.

Experts believe the ornate decoration features the hero Ulysses in scenes from Homer's Iliad and Odyssey -- both hugely popular throughout the Greek world.
In one large painting, Ulysses and his comrades escape from the blind Cyclops Polyphemos' cave, hidden under a flock of sheep. Another depicts a battle between Greeks and Trojans from the Iliad.

Go look at the picture.

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

Before I post the details of today's linkfest, let me supply you with some contact information for those who wish to help our brother in Christ, Abdul Rahman, who is facing death at the hands of the Afghan government for this so-called "crime". (H/T Michelle Malkin)

Abdul was taken into custody and a court case has followed. The story hit public TV on Thursday, March 16. The newscaster stated that an Afghan citizen by the name of Abdul Rahman converted to the Christian religion 16 years ago.

He was questioned, "Do you confess that you have apostacized from Islam?"

He responded, "No, I am not an apostate, I believe in God."

Question: "Do you believe in the Koran?"

Response: "I believe in the Injil (New Testament) and love Jesus Christ.

Yes, that is right -- the government of Afghanistan -- created and supported with American blood and money -- is seeking to execute this man for exercising his fundamental human right (defined under international law in the UN's Universal Declarationon Human Rights over half a century ago) to choose his own religion.

Help this brother out.

Contact the following.

Ambassador Said T. Jawad
Embassy of Afghanistan
2341 Wyoming Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20008
info@embassyofafghanistan.org
(202)483-6410

White House Comment Line
202-456-1111.

U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
202-647-4000

This trial must not be permitted to proceed, for it gives legitimacy to the notion that government has the right to dictate and punish religious choices of citizens.

MORE AT: Blogs for Bush, Michelle Malkin (taking the lead on the issue), Captain's Quarters, Church and State, Below the Beltway, Ordinary Everyday Christian, Conservative Political Rants, Macmind

* * *

You know the drill for my linkfests -- feel free to link here with any interesting posts you have made recently. I won't limit the number of links, but I will ask you to act reasonably. No Porn, no advertising links, please.

Other linkfests at Conservative Cat, Adam's Blog, Third World Country, Bacon Bits

Posted by: Greg at 11:39 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 355 words, total size 4 kb.

And it was the governments of Italy and Germany that did so.

Italy has joined with Germany in protesting a death threat reportedly hanging over an Afghan who became a Christian in Germany and is now charged under Afghanistan's religious laws .
The sharia laws, which rule many Muslim countries, forbid conversion to other religions on pain of death .

Italian Foreign Minister Gianfranco Fini on Tuesday said Italy would raise the case of Abdul Rahman with the Afghan ambassador in Rome, European Union diplomatic representatives in Afghanistan and EU human rights bodies .

Fini said he would voice to the ambassador "the thorough disapproval" of the Italian government if there was a "possibility" of Rahman being sentenced to death. Italy is the de facto EU diplomatic chief in Afghanistan because Austria, which holds the EU's rotating presidency, does not have a mission there .

Italy has some 2,000 troops in the 10,000-strong NATO-led International Security and Assistance force (ISAF), which began peacekeeping operations in and near Kabul a year after a US-led coalition drove out the Islamic fundamentalist Taliban regime in 2002 .

Rome held ISAF's six-month rotating command until last month. It is leading the reconstruction of the Afghan judicial system and has also contributed to other reconstruction projects such as roads, hospitals and schools .

Germany said Tuesday it would appeal directly to Afghan President Hamid Karzai and "do everything in its power" to save the life of Rahman, who returned home from Germany when the Taliban was overthrown.

Unfortunately, the Rahman matter was not addressed by the President at today's press conference.

And the only comment from the State Department was a weak one.

more...

Posted by: Greg at 01:54 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 1278 words, total size 9 kb.

1 It's kinda scary for Italy and Germany to ally with one another regardless of the cause....

Just an off-the-cuff thought

Posted by: beth at Sun Mar 26 16:31:49 2006 (X6tm3)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Michelle Malkin shows us this poster, courtesy of the United Nations.

The poster was thought-provoking.

Applying the Left's diversity hemenuetic, I am left asking a difficult
question:

Is the Lego racist for refusing to adopt the majority culture by
conforming to the puzzle, or is the puzzle an oppressor guilty of racism,
ethnocentrism, and cultural imperialism for refusing to accept the
cultural and lifestyle diversity of the minority Lego?

Enquiring minds want to know!

In the mean time, God bless Denmark, and to hell with those who would give into the followers of Islam's false prophet!

MORE AT: Euphoric Reality, Slapstick Politics, GZ Expat, Right Voices, Blogmeister, USA, Solomonia, Mean Mr. Mustard, Jesse Richardson, Vital Perspective, Secular Blasphemy, In The Bullpen, Liberty Just In Case

Posted by: Greg at 01:38 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 140 words, total size 2 kb.

Every week, Watcher of Weasels sponsors a contest seeking the most notable posts from around the Blogosphere. The winning entries are determined by The Watchers Council.

The Council has cast their votes for last week's submitted posts.

Council Member Entries:
Gates of Vienna won first place with King Solomon and the Roe-Men.

Non-Council Entries:
NHS Blog Doctor was victorious with The Crippen Diaries (Week 11).

The Watcher's Council has one vacant seat. Get additional info right here and application guidelines from the Watcher.

Posted by: Greg at 11:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 89 words, total size 1 kb.

I’m glad they caught this guy, suspected of murder in both my city and his own. And I’m glad that this no-class gang loser has a nickname that fits him – at least until they fry him.

The hunt for a suspected gang leader linked to homicides in both Houston and New Orleans ended early today with his arrest in Kenner, La., police said.

Officers arrested Ivory "B-Stupid" Harris, 20, about 3 a.m. while serving a search warrant at a home in the New Orleans suburb.

Harris was charged with murder for the Feb. 28 shooting death of Jermaine Wise, 22, in New Orleans. Officers found the victim dead about 1:30 a.m. inside a car parked along the 5300 block of Constance Street.

Houston police said Harris is apparently connected to the Dec. 28 slaying of Steven Kennedy, 24, at 1303 La Concha.

Harris was reported to be travelling with Jerome Hampton, 24, who has been charged with Kennedy's death, which police said was a revenge killing for the 2003 murder of James "Soulja Slim" Tapp, a New Orleans rapper.

Hampton, known as "Man-Man," was arrested Mar. 12 by New Orleans police.
Harris also is linked to two other murders in Houston, one that occurred on Dec. 17 and a second on Jan. 4. Police said the slayings may have resulted from disputes over women.

To date, however, Harris has only been charged with a Dec. 18 armed robbery case at Greenspoint Mall, Houston police said.

B-Stupid – sounds about right to me.

Posted by: Greg at 01:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 261 words, total size 2 kb.

While the one may have been less elegant and academic, no matter how you slice it, it comes out the same – the Kennedy School's Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago join with the former Klan leader and the virulently anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood in proclaiming that the Jews control America.

A paper recently co-authored by the academic dean of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government about the allegedly far-reaching influence of an "Israel lobby" is winning praise from white supremacist David Duke.

The Palestine Liberation Organization mission to Washington is distributing the paper, which also is being hailed by a senior member of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization.

But the paper, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," by the Kennedy School's Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, is meeting with a more critical reception from many of those it names as part of the lobby. The 83-page "working paper" claims a network of journalists, think tanks, lobbyists, and largely Jewish officials have seized the foreign policy debate and manipulated America to invade Iraq. Included in this network, the authors say, are the editors of the New York Times, the scholars at the Brookings Institution, students at Columbia, "pro-Israel" senior officials in the executive branch, and "neoconservative gentiles" including columnist George Will.

Duke, a former Louisiana state legislator and one-time Ku Klux Klan leader, called the paper "a great step forward," but he said he was "surprised" that the Kennedy School would publish the report.

"I have read about the report and read one summary already, and I am surprised how excellent it is," he said in an e-mail. "It is quite satisfying to see a body in the premier American University essentially come out and validate every major point I have been making since even before the war even started." Duke added that "the task before us is to wrest control of America's foreign policy and critical junctures of media from the Jewish extremist Neocons that seek to lead us into what they expectantly call World War IV."

I guess that anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism really have gone mainstream on the Left.

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 366 words, total size 2 kb.

While the one may have been less elegant and academic, no matter how you slice it, it comes out the same – the Kennedy School's Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago join with the former Klan leader and the virulently anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood in proclaiming that the Jews control America.

A paper recently co-authored by the academic dean of Harvard's Kennedy School of Government about the allegedly far-reaching influence of an "Israel lobby" is winning praise from white supremacist David Duke.

The Palestine Liberation Organization mission to Washington is distributing the paper, which also is being hailed by a senior member of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood, an Islamist organization.

But the paper, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," by the Kennedy School's Stephen Walt and John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago, is meeting with a more critical reception from many of those it names as part of the lobby. The 83-page "working paper" claims a network of journalists, think tanks, lobbyists, and largely Jewish officials have seized the foreign policy debate and manipulated America to invade Iraq. Included in this network, the authors say, are the editors of the New York Times, the scholars at the Brookings Institution, students at Columbia, "pro-Israel" senior officials in the executive branch, and "neoconservative gentiles" including columnist George Will.

Duke, a former Louisiana state legislator and one-time Ku Klux Klan leader, called the paper "a great step forward," but he said he was "surprised" that the Kennedy School would publish the report.

"I have read about the report and read one summary already, and I am surprised how excellent it is," he said in an e-mail. "It is quite satisfying to see a body in the premier American University essentially come out and validate every major point I have been making since even before the war even started." Duke added that "the task before us is to wrest control of America's foreign policy and critical junctures of media from the Jewish extremist Neocons that seek to lead us into what they expectantly call World War IV."

I guess that anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism really have gone mainstream on the Left.

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 372 words, total size 2 kb.

She has called it her dream job in the past, and the sport is one of her passions. Could Condoleezza Rice be moving to the NFL?

Paul Tagliabue is retiring as NFL commissioner in July after more than 16 years on the job.

The 65-year-old commissioner has led the league since 1989, when he succeeded Pete Rozelle, and agreed last March to stay to complete the television and labor deals.

He finally got that done 12 days ago, finishing the most arduous labor negotiations since the league and union agreed on a free agency-salary cap deal in 1992.

"I believe that now is a positive time to make the transition to a new commissioner," Tagliabue said in a statement.

Roger Goodell, the NFL's chief operating officer, and Atlanta general manager Rich McKay are the two leading candidates to succeed Tagliabue. Baltimore Ravens president Dick Cass is considered a dark horse. Well, it was an interesting career path suggestion.

Posted by: Greg at 01:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 168 words, total size 1 kb.

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Well, my darling bride and I went to the final three days of RodeoHouston over the weekend. Saw LoneStar, Brooks & Dunn, and Gretchen Wilson in the space of less than 48 hours, along with some great rodeo. I've gotten a little behind, though, so there are a couple of stories I want to comment upon, just for the record.

And for the thirtieth straight year -- upsets are screwing with my NCAA picks!

Posted by: Greg at 11:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 78 words, total size 1 kb.

These rumors have been floating around for some time. Hopefully this will lay them to rest.

Vice President Dick Cheney, a lightning rod for criticism about administration policies, on Sunday rejected the notion of resigning and said he would serve out his term.

"I made sure both in 2000 and 2004 that the president had other options. I mean, I didn't ask for this job. I didn't campaign for it. I got drafted," Cheney said on CBS television's "Face The Nation."

Being part of the administration was a highlight of his career, Cheney said. "I've now been elected to a second term. I'll serve out my term," he said.

No one with any sense thought he was -- though I would have loved to see Condoleezza Rice take the job and the GOP nomination if he did.

(H/T Blogs for Bush)

Posted by: Greg at 11:40 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.

I am not supportive of this.

States have been passing laws regarding funeral protests by the reprehensible blasphemers of the Lord's name from Westboro Baptist (sic) Church (sic), the family cult bred by Fred Phelps. I've not been ver supportive. But now there is a move to make the ban a federal one -- and I really have to object.

A Michigan congressman will introduce federal legislation to block protests during military funeral services in response to a Kansas churchÂ’s continued demonstrations at servicemembersÂ’ burials.

Rep. Mike Rogers said he wonÂ’t officially submit the bill until later this month, but colleagues in Congress have already scheduled a hearing in early April and pledged their support for the measure.

The proposal would prohibit protests an hour before or after a funeral at any national cemetery, and force protesters back at least 500 feet from the grieving family. Penalties for violations still need to be worked out.

“When you go to a funeral, it’s difficult enough to show up and pay your respects to someone who died for their country without getting jeered, taunted and harassed,” said Rogers, a Republican. “There’s a difference between free speech and hateful, harassing speech.”

On Thursday, Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., introduced similar legislation in the Senate, creating a 300-foot buffer zone and making violations punishable by up to five years in prison. Bayh’s bill would apply to “all funerals for soldiers who were killed in active duty service.”

There is no reason to make this a federal issue -- such regulatiosn bvelong more properly on the state and local level, if they are to be passed at all. What, are we going to have the FBI out enforcing these bans? More to the point, why should such a ban be limited to military funerals? After all, why shouldn't it include the funerals of dead gay folks targetted by the Phelps family of primitives? Why shouldn't it include ANY funeral, if this is truly a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction and not simply legislation targetted at the message?

H/T Jawa Report, Stop the ACLU, Bluto, Vince, Kerfuffles)

Posted by: Greg at 11:37 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 363 words, total size 3 kb.

We put this crew in power -- we can take them out.

An Afghan man who recently admitted he converted to Christianity faces the death penalty under the country's strict Islamic legal system. The trial is a critical test of Afghanistan's new constitution and democratic government.

The case is attracting widespread attention in Afghanistan, where local media are closely monitoring the landmark proceedings.

Abdul Rahman, 40, was arrested last month, accused of converting to Christianity. Under Afghanistan's new constitution, minority religious rights are protected but Muslims are still subject to strict Islamic laws. And so, officially, Muslim-born Rahman is charged with rejecting Islam and not for practicing Christianity.

Appearing in court earlier this week Rahman insisted he should not be considered an infidel, but admitted he is a Christian. He says he still believes in the almighty Allah, but cannot say for sure who God really is. "I am," he says, "a Christian and I believe in Jesus Christ."

Rahman reportedly converted more than 16 years ago after spending time working in Germany. Officials say his family, who remain observant Muslims, turned him over to the authorities. On Thursday the prosecution told the court Rahman has rejected numerous offers to embrace Islam. Prosecuting attorney Abdul Wasi told the judge that the punishment should fit the crime.

He says Rahman is a traitor to Islam and is like a cancer inside Afghanistan. Under Islamic law and under the Afghan constitution, he says, the defendant should be executed. The court has ordered a delay in the proceedings to give Rahman time to hire an attorney. Under Afghan law, once a verdict is given, the case can be appealed twice to higher courts.

These are the folks we put in power doing this -- and our troops are still supporting them. The President must pressure the government of Afghanistan to drop this prosecution -- and this law -- and if the Afghans fail to do so, then we must act to impose a secular government that respects human rights. We'v done it once, maybe this time we can do it successfully. Also, where is the outcry from human rights activists who want rights for terrorists? Don't peaceful Christians have human rights?

H/T Jawa Report>, Michelle Malkin, Below the Beltway, Latino Issues, Church & State)

MORE AT: Blogs for Bush, Michelle Malkin (taking the lead on the issue), Captain's Quarters, Church and State, Below the Beltway, Ordinary Everyday Christian, Conservative Political Rants, Macmind

Posted by: Greg at 11:36 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 423 words, total size 4 kb.

I'm dead serious here. After SVU co-star/conspiracy nutjob/moonbat Richard Belzer made these comments on Bill Maher's show, I think it might be appropriate.

Belzer: “Okay, fine. No one questions the nobility and the honor that these men and woman who are serving and what they're doing. No one questions that. But now they're targets, they're not going out. Now they're just protecting each other and they're in the middle of a civil war. So it's really not fair to have these people who volunteered their lives to protect our nation under false pretenses to now be, to have targets-”

Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen, over loud applause for Belzer: “Ask them. Ask them if it's fair! Wait a minute, wait a minute. My stepson, wait a minute, my stepson-”

Belzer: “That's bullshit: ask them! They're not, they don't read twenty newspapers a day. They're under the threat of death every minute. They're not the best people to ask about the war because they're gonna die any second.”

So, Mr. Belzer, those on-site are not in the position you are to evaluate the war? You know, those fignting and (sometines) dying are not capable of making an evaluationof the situation -- but some dub-ass actor/conspiracy theorist is mopre than qualified to do so because he reads the same wire-service reports out of the twenty different newspapers every day?

Not only that, Belzer and Maher indicate a certain contempt for the troops, even as tehy proclaim sympathy for them.

Ros-Lehtinen: “Wait a minute! You are talking about my stepson, my stepson who just finished last week eight months of duty-”

Belzer over Ros-Lehtenin: “God bless your stepson. Doesn't mean he's a brilliant scholar about the war because he's there. (applause) And God bless him.”

Ros-Lehtinen, quite agitated: “Oh, you are though! You are though? Okay.”

Belzer: “Well I have more time, I'm not there. My life is not under threat.”

Ros-Lehtinen: “Thank you. I'm glad.”

Maher: “I think the point he's trying to make is that a 19-year-old who is in that army because he probably couldn't find other employment-”

Ros-Lehtinen: “He's a college graduate. He's a Marine officer. He volunteered for the Marines.”

Belzer: “He's the exception for the rule.”

Ros-Lehtinen: “He's not the exception for the rule. I've been there-”

Belzer: “You think everyone over there is a college graduate? They're 19 and 20-year-old kids who couldn't get a job-”

Ros-Lehtinen: “Yeah, you know because you've been there and-”

Belzer: “What, I don't fucking read!? Don't do that!”

I love the blasphemous use of "God bless him" by Belzer. He's just indicated that he thinks this Iraq vet is an unemployable dullard who was duped into joining the military and is too stupid to know what is going on around him -- but "God bless him." But Belzer, having read the newspaper this morning, claims to be an expert on the war in Iraq.

I'll be finding something else to watch as long as Belzer remains on SVU. I encourage American patriots to do the same.

MORE AT: 24 Hour Blender Repair, Plains Feeder, Iowa Voice, Cursed by a Classical Education, Andric's Delusions, Nashville News, Diary of a Holywood Refugee, So Put Your Hand In Mine, Center for Sanity, Talk Show American, Right Winged, Protein Wisdom, Blogging Man 2007, NewsBusters, American Conservative Daily

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Conservative Cat, Stuck on Stupid, Adam's Blog, Samantha Burns, Third World Country, Liberal Wrong Wing, Bacon Bits, Real Ugly American, Camelot Destra Ideale, Voteswagon, Uncooperative Blogger, Blue Star, Jo's Cafe

Posted by: Greg at 06:30 AM | Comments (13) | Add Comment
Post contains 605 words, total size 6 kb.

Proving once again that the business plan for the failing Leftist radio network includes treason and sedition, host Mike Malloy accuses American military personnel of trading "war pornography", being murderers, and likened them to Nazis.

More details at Expose the Left, Wizbang, Jawa Report, BoreAmerica, MoveOnAndShutUp.Org, Kerfuffles, Conservative Culture, Say Anything

Posted by: Greg at 05:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

I just love this editorial from the Richmond Times Dispatch, a paper which I loved during my time in college in Virginia.

Stifling Dissent

In a recent speech on foreign soil, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said people who disagree with her are dangerous, irrational, slavery-loving, bigoted threats to the country.

Not in so many words, mind you. Ms. Ginsburg is far too nuanced for that. But she did say that she and her former colleague, Sandra Day O'Connor, had been the target of death threats (actually, a single menacing posting on an Internet chatroom) from the "irrational fringe" -- and that Republican Congressmen "fuel the irrational fringe" by opposing the growing practice of interpreting the Constitution in light of foreign law.

Many people have disputed the idea that Justices should base their rulings on cues from foreign countries rather than the American Constitution. Ms. Ginsburg noted that one of them was Roger Taney, in his infamous Dred Scott decision. (Because Taney was wrong about slavery, and he also believed that 2 + 2 = 4, we evidently must conclude that mathematical equation also is incorrect.) She pointed out that defenders of Apartheid in South Africa, where she gave her talk, resisted calls from abroad to end the segregation system. Oh, and Justice Antonin Scalia disagrees with her, too. Those people are all alike.

Ms. Ginsburg's thinly veiled attempt to establish guilt by association is a shopworn technique. It was exploited most famously by Joseph McCarthy to intimidate those who disagreed with him. Joseph Stalin also used guilt by association to send potential resisters of Soviet Communist tyranny to the gulag. Recently an Italian commission concluded that the Soviet Union was behind the attempt to assassinate Pope John Paul II.

We are not, of course, in any way suggesting that people who share Ms. Ginsburg's approach are McCarthyite Communist mass-murdering anti-Catholic plotters of papicide. We wouldn't stoop to that level.

Why does she?

Bravo!

If Justice Ginsburg feels that criticism of the Judiciary by members of the co-equal Legislative Branch of government and (even lmore unacceptable) We, the People, is unacceptable and a danger to her safety, I'm sure she can find some court case or law from North Korea, Iran, Cuba, or the People's Republic of China that she and her peers can use to trump both the clear language of the First Amendment that permits such speech and Article III, which gives Congress specific power to check the Judicial Branch.

And if she finds that she cannot get a majority behind her unAmerican goal of suppressing and delegitimizing criticism of the courts on the clearly specious grounds of an epidemic of violence and threats against judges, perhaps she can safeguard her own miserable hide by resigning. I'm sure the Justice Department already has a suitable slate of possible replacements to send over to the president for his consideration.

More At: Colossus of Rhodey

Posted by: Greg at 05:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 498 words, total size 3 kb.

This seems rather disturbing -- and potentially illegal.

Senate Democrats have mapped a political battle plan for the March congressional recess that calls on lawmakers to stage press events with active duty military personnel, veterans and emergency responders to bash President Bush on virtually every one of his national security policies.

Seems to me that they are out to undermine the civilian control of the armed forces, as well as subborning violations of the UCMJ provisions limiting the political speech and activities of members of the military.

SHAME! (But then again, the party of Teddy the Swimmer, Robert the Kleagle and Howard the Screamer has no shame.)

Posted by: Greg at 05:08 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 119 words, total size 1 kb.

IÂ’ve made the argument in the past that state sanctioning of homosexual marriage will inevitably lead to state sanctioning of group marriage. Charles Krauthammer, one of the most gifted conservative columnists living today, makes that argument much more effectively than I ever have.

As Newsweek notes, these stirrings for the mainstreaming of polygamy (or, more accurately, polyamory) have their roots in the increasing legitimization of gay marriage. In an essay 10 years ago, I pointed out that it is utterly logical for polygamy rights to follow gay rights. After all, if traditional marriage is defined as the union of (1) two people of (2) opposite gender, and if, as advocates of gay marriage insist, the gender requirement is nothing but prejudice, exclusion and an arbitrary denial of one's autonomous choices in love, then the first requirement -- the number restriction (two and only two) -- is a similarly arbitrary, discriminatory and indefensible denial of individual choice.

This line of argument makes gay activists furious. I can understand why they do not want to be in the same room as polygamists. But I'm not the one who put them there. Their argument does. Blogger and author Andrew Sullivan, who had the courage to advocate gay marriage at a time when it was considered pretty crazy, has called this the "polygamy diversion," arguing that homosexuality and polygamy are categorically different because polygamy is a mere "activity" while homosexuality is an intrinsic state that "occupies a deeper level of human consciousness."

But this distinction between higher and lower orders of love is precisely what gay rights activists so vigorously protest when the general culture "privileges" (as they say in the English departments) heterosexual unions over homosexual ones. . . .

To simplify the logic, take out the complicating factor of gender mixing. Posit a union of, say, three gay women all deeply devoted to each other. On what grounds would gay activists dismiss their union as mere activity rather than authentic love and self-expression? On what grounds do they insist upon the traditional, arbitrary and exclusionary number of two?

Indeed, once the law is untethered from the definition of marriage which has dominated Western civilization (especially since the beginning of the Christian era) for at least two millennia, then there is really no legitimate basis for arbitrarily upholding any part of that traditional definition. And if, the Lawrence v. Texas holding that “

UPDATE: Eric at The Liberty Papers takes on the issue of homosexual marriage and polygamy from a libertarian perspective.

One of the strongest arguments in favor of gay marriage that IÂ’ve encountered is the one that says that the government has no right to intrude into the personal relationships of consenting adults and forbid them from entering into a legal status, in this case marriage, that they wish to enter into freely. This doesnÂ’t mean that government is endorsing the relationship, any more than it endorses a producer of pornographic films who forms a corporation to run his business. It merely means that the government is allowing people to engage in consensual activities that affect nobody but themselves. The logic, if you accept it, seems to me to be unassailable and its hard for me to find an argument that says that polygamy is per se different.

As much as I would like to endorse his position, I canÂ’t, because the legal recognition of homosexual marriage brings with it government imposed legal burdens upon those not party to that personal relationship. After all, giving legal status to homosexual couples then subjects those who have moral and/or religious objections does not just give the parties to that marriage standing and status before the government. Rather, it also gives them certain special status regarding retirement and healthcare benefits, non-discrimination in housing, and other so-called rights (legal privileges, actually, that are framed as rights) in relationship to private individuals and entities. As such, the recognition of a legal status for homosexual couples forces non-consenting individuals with moral and/or religious objections to act in a manner contrary to their sincerely held beliefs.

So long as such parties to homosexual marriage are in a position to use the power of government to force non-consenting individuals and entities to recognize and reward a relationship that is repugnant to them, then the argument that nobody is harmed by permitting homosexual marriage (or polygamy) must fail – unless we redefine the benefits conferred by the granting of legal status to those relationships. But if we do that, don’t most of the arguments in favor of granting legal recognition to those relationships evaporate?

Others writing include Andrew Sullivan, Ann Althouse, Kathleen Kersten, Susie Bright, Sister Toldjah, , Chez Diva, Icarus Fallen, Uncommon Sense, Bullwinkle Blog, Below the Beltway, Prodigal Sun, Dappled Things, Right Side of the Rainbow,

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Conservative Cat, Stuck on Stupid, Adam's Blog, Samantha Burns, Third World Country, Liberal Wrong Wing, Bacon Bits, Real Ugly American, Camelot Destra Ideale, Voteswagon, Uncooperative Blogger, Blue Star, Jo's Cafe

Posted by: Greg at 10:14 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 926 words, total size 8 kb.

This is too weird.

Talk about a wild night near Seguin. A cow came flying out of its trailer, sent DPS and police scrambling, and left two police cars going up in flames.

"It was almost hard to believe," said Detective Sergeant Maureen Watson. She has been in law enforcement for 15 years, and says she "never had a day like this. I mean the best way to characterize this it, is it's bizarre. It's really really strange."

It's strange because it started out with a truck towing cattle, and ended in fire.
Watson told News 4 WOAI, "We believe the gate of the cattle trailer came open, and the cow, for lack of a better phrase spilled out onto the Interstate. It was pretty chaotic for a while."

Several cars hit some of the cows. One cow died. DPS troopers called for backup.

That's when one officer was nearly run down by a speeding truck, carrying two illegal immigrants inside.

Seguin Police were out looking for those illegal immigrants. They parked their cars in the hot grass, burning two of them including that brand new 2006 Crown Victoria. Watson said, "Well, all of a sudden, another officer who'd arrived on the scene, alerted the sergeant that there was a fire."

Everything inside was destroyed, including tens of thousands of dollars worth of equipment designed for the patrol cars.

"You start off with kind of a bizarre accident with these cows spilling onto the interstate. That leads to other accidents, that leads to a car chase, that leads to a foot chase," Watson recalls.

The two Mexican immigrants, ages 21 and 23, are in custody for illegally entering the country and evading arrest. Watson says they have replacement cars for now, but hope the city council will vote to get new cars soon.

Uh, yeah.

Posted by: Greg at 10:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 315 words, total size 2 kb.

I donÂ’t blame these guys for seeking to pass a law setting out specific guidelines for surveillance of foreign communications that involve an Americans. I just find the idea to be a flawed, especially because of the conclusion that some will draw from it.

The Bush administration could continue its policy of spying on targeted Americans without obtaining warrants, but only if it justifies the action to a small group of lawmakers, under legislation introduced yesterday by key Republican senators.

The four senators hope to settle the debate over National Security Agency eavesdropping on international communications involving Americans when one of the parties is suspected of terrorist ties. President Bush prompted a months-long uproar when he said that constitutional powers absolve him of the need to seek warrants in such cases, even though the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act requires warrants for domestic wiretaps.

The program, begun in 2001, was first publicized late last year.

The bill would allow the NSA to eavesdrop, without a warrant, for up to 45 days per case, at which point the Justice Department would have three options. It could drop the surveillance, seek a warrant from FISA's court, or convince a handful of House and Senate members that although there is insufficient evidence for a warrant, continued surveillance "is necessary to protect the United States," according to a summary the four sponsors provided yesterday.

They are Mike DeWine (Ohio), Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.), Chuck Hagel (Neb.) and Olympia J. Snowe (Maine).

I think the motive is good – these Senators want to settle the issue once and for all. Unfortunately, this bill does not accomplish that end – in fact, it muddies the waters even further.

First, as IÂ’ve already pointed out, Congress lacks the authority to prevent such surveillance, as the Constitution grants the President the inherent power to conduct it to protect national security. Nothing Congress does can limit that power, any more than the President can issue an executive order limiting the power of Congress to consider certain legislation.

Second, the legislation could be interpreted by partisans opposed to the President (or the security of the United States) to be a concession that the current program is illegal. IÂ’ve already seen gleeful Leftists make exactly that assertion, despite the fact that this is clearly not the intent of the bill. Simply put, you do not give your enemies (and the enemies of the United States) ammunition to attack programs essential to protecting the national security of the United States.

No, this piece of legislation needs to be withdrawn immediately, for the good of national security and the preservation of presidential power under the Constitution.

Posted by: Greg at 10:07 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 455 words, total size 4 kb.

I’m not a big fan of reparations, generations-late apologies, and ethnic guilt – but I do believe that historical wrongs need to be brought to light and remembered lest we repeat them. Thus I am very happy to hear about this program.

OYSTER BAY, N.Y. — A group of mostly white seventh and eighth graders sleepily sauntered into their school library on a recent morning, soon to get a surprise awakening about a part of their town's history they never knew existed.

"Did anybody in this room know there were 60 enslaved Africans, people, human beings, buried a mile from here?" Alan Singer, a professor at Hofstra University, asked them. "Those people have been erased from history. It is as if they never existed."

Singer and Mary Carter, a retired middle school social studies teacher, were in Oyster Bay to speak to the kids — part of a quest to develop a public school curriculum guide focusing on slavery's impact in the northern U.S., specifically New York.

Their efforts have been buoyed by state legislation enacted last year creating the Amistad Commission to examine whether the slave trade is being adequately taught in New York schools.

The commission, one of a number formed around the country in recent years, is named for the slave ship Amistad, which was commandeered by slaves who eventually won their freedom in the U.S. Supreme Court.

"Many people are surprised when you talk about slavery's existence in New York," Carter said. "They're surprised because it's taught as something that happened in the South."

Yeah, that is right – slavery was a Northern phenomenon as well as a Southern one. Let’s remember that in our discussions of race, culture, and region.

Posted by: Greg at 10:03 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 293 words, total size 2 kb.

Neverland Ranch is Kaput.

Michael Jackson has shut down his Neverland Ranch for good.

Employees were summoned to the ranch Thursday at 5 p.m. PST in staggered groups, given back pay for 12 weeks through today, and were told the ranch had been shut down by the California Department of Labor.

In fact, Jackson made the decision to lay off more than 60 loyal staffers after making them wait through three months with no pay. Their health insurance ran out on February 28th. Last week, the State closed the ranch because Jackson carried no workmen's compensation.

Despite misleading statements from JacksonÂ’s spokesperson Raymone Bain, I am told that Neverland is indeed closed except to JacksonÂ’s family members and security staff.

Some of the employees of Neverland had been there with Jackson since he bought the place in the late 80s. A few actually had worked for the previous owner. They leave without pensions or the ability to apply for COBRA health insurance. All they can do now is apply for unemployment. My sources say many of them have already done that.

I wonder – will the California legislature look into the working conditions of employees of major entertainments, and regulate that industry? Or is it only the productive sector of America that has to bear the burden of government imposed labor rules?

Posted by: Greg at 10:02 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 1 kb.

I've noticed a trend at school of more fights for trivial reasons. You know, someone steps on a shoe or makes a rude comment and the "victim" comes out swinging. I'd assumed it was just high spirits on the part of kids or increased awareness on my part -- but now I see it is probably part of a larger trend.

Andre Vincent Jr. was inside a Forestville carryout, joking with a neighborhood acquaintance. When the wordplay turned tense, Vincent, 19, tried to defuse the situation, waving off Wendell E. Jones and saying, "Ah, y'all a clown."

Thirty minutes later, as Vincent stepped to his car with a group of friends, Jones, 22 at the time, sneaked up behind him and fired six bullets into his head. As Jones walked away, court testimony would reveal, he snickered, "Who's the clown now?"

The 2004 murder was part of what law enforcement sees as an alarming trend in Prince George's County: low-"flash point" killings, in which attackers resort to deadly violence over trivial confrontations.

Police say the trend, in part, drove the sharp increase in the county's homicide count last year: 173, a record and a spike from the 148 that occurred in 2004. Twenty people have been killed in the county as of yesterday, compared with 33 by the same date in 2005.

Any speculation on what causes this increased tendency to resort to deadly force over trivial insults? Any suggestions over what to do about it?

Posted by: Greg at 11:37 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

Aye and Begorrah, it is the weekend of Leprechauns and Green Beer! It is also time for my usual weekend Linkfest and Open Trackback Party.

You know the drill -- feel free to link here with any interesting posts you have made recently. I won't limit the number of links, but I will ask you to act reasonably. No Porn, no advertising links, please.

We'll be open here all weekend!

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT: Conservative Cat, Stuck on Stupid, Adam's Blog, Samantha Burns, Third World Country, Liberal Wrong Wing, Bacon Bits, Real Ugly American, Camelot Destra Ideale, Voteswagon, Uncooperative Blogger, Blue Star, Jo's Cafe

Posted by: Greg at 11:10 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 2 kb.

His position, when you come right down to it, is a reasonable and legitimate one for someone to hold.

The Rev. Franklin Graham, who outraged Muslims in 2001 when he said that Islam "is a very evil and wicked religion," told an interviewer for Wednesday's edition of ABC News "Nightline" that he hasn't changed his mind about the faith.

Asked by ABC correspondent John Donvan whether Muslim groups had succeeded in altering his outlook about Islam, Graham said "No."

"Do they want to indoctrinate me? Yes. I know about Islam. I don't need an education from Islam," he said. "If people think Islam is such a wonderful religion, just go to Saudi Arabia and make it your home. Just live there. If you think Islam is such a wonderful religion, I mean, go and live under the Taliban somewhere. I mean, you're free to do that."

Read the Koran. Read the Hadith. Look at the history and the present of Islam. It is hard to argue with the assessment of this Christian leader -- especially when one considers that the claims made about Christ by Islam can only be described as blasphemous.

Let's delve a little deeper into why he makes the claim.

The younger Graham angered Muslims following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks when he told NBC News: "We're not attacking Islam but Islam has attacked us. The God of Islam is not the same God. He's not the son of God of the Christian or Judeo-Christian faith. It's a different God, and I believe it is a very evil and wicked religion."

Islam is a religion that claims the Old and New Testaments are wrong and corrupted (despite the fact that evidence shows remarkable accuracy in the preservation of OT texts over the last couple of millenia, andthe evidence of the textual fidelity of the New Testament is very strong. Jesus is relegated to the status of prophet, and thee Resurrection is labeled as false. Sounds like a different God to me.

And Graham makes a crucial distinction, one I affirm with him.

In a subsequent Wall Street Journal piece, Graham wrote that he doesn't think Muslim believers "are evil people because of their faith. But I decry the evil that has been done in the name of Islam, or any other faith — including Christianity."

Good people -- evil faith.

Posted by: Greg at 05:58 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 407 words, total size 2 kb.