April 16, 2006
In a surprising editorial, The Washington Post deviated from the conventional anti-Bush media position on two counts. It said President Bush was right to declassify parts of a National Intelligence Estimate to make clear why he thought Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons. And the editorial said ex-ambassador Joseph Wilson was wrong to think he had debunked Bush on the nuclear charge because Wilson's statements after visiting Niger actually "supported the conclusion that Iraq had sought uranium."In the orthodox narrative line, Wilson is the truth-teller and the Bush the liar. But Wilson was not speaking truthfully when he said his wife, Victoria Plame, had nothing to do with the CIA sending him to Niger. And it obviously wasn't true, as Wilson claimed, that he had found nothing to support Bush's charge about Niger when he (Wilson) had been told that the Iraqis were poking around in that uranium-rich nation.
Testifying before the Senate intelligence committee, Wilson said that the former prime minister of Niger told him he had been asked to meet with Iraqis to talk about "expanding commercial relations" between the two countries. Everybody knew what that meant; Niger has nothing much to trade other than uranium.
Yeah, that's right -- Niger doesn't have much else to export, and Wilson confirmed that Iraq was seeking to do business with Niger. What else would Iraq have been after -- goats, camels, and slaves?
More to the point, every subsequent investigation into the Niger story shows that there was plenty of other evidence to back the contention thqat Iraq was seeking uranium.
The forged documents claiming an Iraq-Niger connection were so crude that they could never have fooled the CIA or British intelligence for very long. Who would do this, and do it so badly? Nobody knows. But if the forgeries were meant to distract from other evidence that Bush was right, then they certainly worked. Look around in American journalism, and you will find great certitude that the forgeries destroyed Bush's claim.That certitude can only be founded on the belief that Tony Blair, the U.S. Senate intelligence committee and the special investigative team of Parliament were all liars when they said there was substantial non-forged evidence backing Bush's claim. The investigative team was headed by the highly regarded Lord Butler, who served as a Cabinet minister under five prime ministers. It concluded that Bush's 16 words about Iraq's uranium shopping were "well-founded."
Actually, there is one other way to discount the Butler report: Either muffle or don't mention it in your news columns. The New York Times opted for muffling. A database search finds no mention of "well-founded" in the Times reporting, and only one barely scrutable paragraph about uranium in the Butler report, way down in the 11th paragraph of a story buried well inside the paper.
In other words, the reason that the "Bush lied" meme survives is because most of the press simply refuses to give substantive discussion to the evidence of Iraqi attempts to purchase uranium. Instead, Joe Wilson and his wife are painted as martyrs, and his claims are validated based upon that status -- despite the fact that every investigation of his claims have led to the opposite conclusion.
Posted by: Greg at
10:35 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 591 words, total size 4 kb.
1 Now the first day of the week Mary Magdalene went to the tomb early, while it was still dark, and saw that the stone had been taken away from the tomb.2 Then she ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and said to them, “They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we do not know where they have laid Him.”
3 Peter therefore went out, and the other disciple, and were going to the tomb.
4 So they both ran together, and the other disciple outran Peter and came to the tomb first.
5 And he, stooping down and looking in, saw the linen cloths lying there; yet he did not go in.
6 Then Simon Peter came, following him, and went into the tomb; and he saw the linen cloths lying there,
7 and the handkerchief that had been around His head, not lying with the linen cloths, but folded together in a place by itself.
8 Then the other disciple, who came to the tomb first, went in also; and he saw and believed.
9 For as yet they did not know the Scripture, that He must rise again from the dead.
10 Then the disciples went away again to their own homes.
11 But Mary stood outside by the tomb weeping, and as she wept she stooped down and looked into the tomb.
12 And she saw two angels in white sitting, one at the head and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain.
13 Then they said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping?”
She said to them, “Because they have taken away my Lord, and I do not know where they have laid Him.”14 Now when she had said this, she turned around and saw Jesus standing there, and did not know that it was Jesus.
15 Jesus said to her, “Woman, why are you weeping? Whom are you seeking?”
She, supposing Him to be the gardener, said to Him, “Sir, if You have carried Him away, tell me where You have laid Him, and I will take Him away.”16 Jesus said to her, “Mary!”
She turned and said to Him, “Rabboni!” (which is to say, Teacher).17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’”
18 Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord,
and that He had spoken these things to her.19 Then, the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood in the midst, and said to them, “Peace be with you.”
20 When He had said this, He showed them His hands and His side. Then the disciples were glad when they saw the Lord.
21 So Jesus said to them again, “Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.”
22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit.
23 If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”
Posted by: Greg at
05:59 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 602 words, total size 3 kb.
(RealAudio)
Rejoice, heavenly powers! Sing choirs of angels!
Exult, all creation around God's throne!
Jesus Christ, our King is risen!
Sound the trumpet of salvation!
Rejoice, O earth, in shining splendor,
radiant in the brightness of your King!
Christ has conquered! Glory fills you!
Darkness vanishes for ever!
Rejoice, O Mother Church! Exult in glory!
The risen Savior shines upon you!
Let this place resound with joy,
echoing the mighty song of all God's people!
My dearest friends,
standing with me in this holy light,
join me in asking God for mercy,
that he may give his unworthy minister
grace to sing his Easter praises.
The Lord be with you.
And also with you.
Lift up your hearts.
We lift them up to the Lord.
Let us give thanks to the Lord our God.
It is right to give him thanks and praise.
It is truly right that with full hearts and minds and voices
we should praise the unseen God, the all-powerful Father,
and his only Son, our Lord Jesus Christ.
For Christ has ransomed us with his blood,
and paid for us the price of Adam's sin to our eternal Father!
This is our passover feast,
When Christ, the true Lamb, is slain,
whose blood consecrates the homes of all believers.
This is the night,
when first you saved our fathers:
you freed the people of Israel from their slav'ry,
and led them dry-shod through the sea.
This is the night,
when the pillar of fire destroyed the darkness of sin.
This is night,
when Christians ev'rywhere,
washed clean of sin and freed from all defilement,
are restored to grace and grow together in holiness.
This is the night,
when Jesus broke the chains of death
and rose triumphant from the grave.
What good would life have been to us,
had Christ not come as our Redeemer?
Father, how wonderful your care for us!
How boundless your merciful love!
To ransom a slave you gave away your Son.
O happy fault, O necessary sin of Adam,
which gained for us so great a Redeemer!
Most blessed of all nights,
chosen by God to see Christ rising from the dead!
Of this night scripture says:
"The night will be as clear as day:
it will become my light, my joy."
The power of this holy night dispels all evil,
washes guilt away, restores lost innocence,
brings mourners joy;
it casts out hatred, brings us peace,
and humbles earthly pride.
Night truly blessed,
when heaven is wedded to earth
and we are reconciled to God!
Therefore, heavenly Father, in the joy of this night,
receive our evening sacrifice of praise,
your Church's solemn offering.
Accept this Easter candle,
a flame divided but undimmed,
a pillar of fire that glows to the honor of God.
Let it mingle with the lights of heaven
and continue bravely burning
to dispel the darkness of this night!
May the Morning Star which never sets
find this flame still burning:
Christ, that Morning Star,
who came back from the dead,
and shed his peaceful light on all mankind,
your Son, who lives and reigns for ever and ever. Amen.
more...
Posted by: Greg at
05:58 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1018 words, total size 7 kb.
What do you think would happen?
We know the answer. There would be marches, protests, outaged community members appearing at emergency meetings to demand that action be taken. State and federal officials would intervene. There would certainly be changes inthe school and district administration, designed to change the "festering culture of racism" that had been permitted to arise in the school.
Well, that isn't what happened at one school in Peoria, Illinois. But then again, the victims were white, and the perpetrators were. . . well, the columnist is too PC to actually tell us what race the perpetrators are. Doing so might be construed as racist, I suppose.
Up to the point a fourth-grader brought a box cutter to school and threatened to kill their daughter, Joe and Jessica Sweeney wanted to give Glen Oak Primary School a chance."'This is our neighborhood. This is where we live. Let's give the public schools a shot,'" is the way Joe describes their reasoning. "We've lived here six years. Let's give it a shot."
* * *
From the beginning, it was uncomfortable. Both children were taunted with racial slurs, particularly Alexis. The Sweeneys tried to make this a life lesson, coaching their kids to respond appropriately. They advised the children to report any threats or poor treatment to teachers, assuming the adults were addressing the problems. And they prayed their kids were simply learning the uncomfortable truth that life can be tough. But the incidents didn't stop, despite a lot of back-and-forth with the school. The kids kept their grades up, but they got pretty quiet.
In mid-March, matters came to a head during an after-school program. Alexis was alone in a bathroom when she was threatened by three other girls. Jessica went to the principal, who brought the ringleader in and made her apologize. Days later, the same girl was back - with a box cutter - threatening to kill Alexis. On the ride home after that incident, Jacob displayed a large bruise on his arm from being shoved to the ground and called a "stupid white boy."
Jessica pulled both kids out of the school immediately.
"I'm done," she says. "I'm done putting her life at risk because you won't do anything."
"This is beyond standard fourth-grade stuff," agrees Joe. "This is becoming racial now. They're not going back."
Frankly, I think these parents should have pulled the kids much earlier. The failure of the school to adequately address the situation should have been a signal that the situation would only get worse. After all, consider how the school and the district responded.
He feels this is a two-part problem. First and most importantly, they feel the school has failed to ensure the children's safety. But, second, they don't think Peoria School District 150 offered much in the way of alternatives or support. The Sweeneys were given the option to switch to Kingman Primary School. They refused. Alexis and Jacob would still be a small part of the handful of white children there."It's racial harassment. It's just the other way," says Joe. "There needs to be a zero-tolerance policy of any type of harassment."
One suggestion was that the family move. Again, they refused. Four houses along their street near Midtown Plaza belong to members of Jessica's family. The kids have plenty of friends - and cousins - in the neighborhood. Their grandmother runs a small business up the block.
"This is our home," Joe says. "It may not be in the best area, but this is our home."
THEY TOLD THE FAMILY TO SELL THEIR HOME AND MOVE! Could you imagine the outrage if they had been a black family in a mostly white school and had been told that the solution was for them to move somewhere where there were more of their own kind? That district would be under court supervision until two or three years after the Second Coming. Individuals would have lost their teaching and administrative credentials. But since the kids are only white, it really is not a big deal, I suppose.
And lest you think this is a family of whiners, consider the situation of the older brother who is a few years ahead of the threatened students.
Unlike other families who have pulled children from Peoria schools in favor of Catholic education or more upscale neighboring districts, the Sweeneys are in a unique position to publicly explain why. They are not fleeing the inner city. This is not a knee-jerk reaction against District 150. And it's tough to brand them as closet racists.They actually have three children. Their oldest son, Caleb, is bi-racial. He has attended District 150 schools and thrived.
"My son is in Von Steuben," Jessica says. "He's mixed. He doesn't have one problem."
The mixed-race child is fine. He isn't subject to the harrassment faced by his younger siblings. So the problem clearly comes down to one of race, and the failure of a school and district to address racist actions by minority children.
Most galling, in my opinion, is the reaction of Assistant Superintendent Cindy Fischer. She claims that all procedures have ben followed correctly.
The bottom of the official line is that the district has policies that were followed in each of these instances. Every one was addressed, in large part through a nationally-recognized program that teaches and reinforces appropriate behavior. District-wide, 150 has four committees exploring various aspects of discipline problems. And for this family, offering Kingman is a respectable option: It is late in the year, so the district is reluctant to make any transfers. But Kingman has fewer discipline problems and several openings. Hines Primary School, which is the Sweeneys' choice because Caleb did well there, has none."It certainly is our regret that we were not able to bring satisfaction to this parent," Fischer says. "As consumers, when we're not satisfied with one product, we go to another. I think that is what this parent has done."
In other words, the family should be thankful that the district even offered the kids refuge in another school -- they could have been required to stay in their old school, under regular threat of violence with no effective response from the administration. And that last line about consumers making choices is positively obscene, for the parents are taxpaying citizens who will still have a portion of their assets extorted from them in the form of taxes to support a school system which so ineffectively dealt with the racial abuse of their children. Yeah, they made a choice to move the kids to a school where they would be safe -- but they are still paying for the school they wish to have their children attend but cannot due to safety concerns.
It is situations like these that make the best case for vouchers -- if not the outright shuttering of the public school system. After all, if the funding of the district actually depended on dealing effectively with racial harrassment of all children -- and not just those of vocal minority communities -- maybe there would be an adequate response.
Posted by: Greg at
12:34 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1268 words, total size 8 kb.
Before the bombs fell on Baghdad, Judith Karpova went there to put herself in harm's way.The veteran activist was among dozens of "human shields" who poured into Iraq as the U.S.-led offensive loomed in early 2003, although she ended up leaving before the war.
Three years later, Karpova is again playing defense, this time against a $6,700 civil fine from the government.
The Treasury Department fined the 61-year-old Hudson Valley woman and three other peace activists who visited Iraq for violating economic sanctions against the country. None of them are paying up quietly, and Karpova is before a federal appeals court disputing charges that she illegally exported services to Iraq as a shield.
"They say it's an export _ Export! _ of services to Iraq, as if a human being is a commodity that can be shipped like light bulbs," Karpova said.
The human shields stationed themselves at potential airstrike targets in Iraq such as food storage warehouses and refineries. U.S. officials warned them that there was no way to guarantee their safety and critics accused them of being pawns of Saddam Hussein. But they said they hoped to prevent attacks on a population that was already suffering.
'Nuf said.
Posted by: Greg at
12:24 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 222 words, total size 1 kb.
April 15, 2006
50 Now behold, there was a man named Joseph, a council member, a good and just man.51 He had not consented to their decision and deed. He was from Arimathea, a city of the Jews, who himself was also waiting for the kingdom of God.
52 This man went to Pilate and asked for the body of Jesus.
53 Then he took it down, wrapped it in linen, and laid it in a tomb that was hewn out of the rock, where no one had ever lain before.
54 That day was the Preparation, and the Sabbath drew near.
55 And the women who had come with Him from Galilee followed after, and they observed the tomb and how His body was laid.
56 Then they returned and prepared spices and fragrant oils. And they rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment.
Posted by: Greg at
05:59 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.
Former Washington Redskins cornerback Darrell R. Green is being urged to run for the state Senate from Loudoun County next year by leading Northern Virginia Republicans who hope he can use his fame on the football field to oust newly elected Democrat Mark R. Herring.Green, one of the most well-known Redskins from the team's recent golden era, lives in Loudoun and has been running a nonprofit foundation since he left the team three years ago.
As a rookie in 1983, he captured the nation's attention with a stunning come-from-behind tackle of Dallas Cowboys running back Tony Dorsett during a Monday Night Football game. Now, some Republicans hope he can help their party recover from a string of bruising losses to Democrats in the past several elections.
"That name is on many lips," said former senator William C. Mims (R), whose Loudoun seat Herring won after Mims left to work in the attorney general's office. "[Green] is a longtime Loudoun resident who has been active in the community. He is highly respected and has an outlook that's consistent with Republican principles."
Green is a good man, and would be a strong candidate. I don't doubt that the name ID would be sufficient to help him win.
And I bet Oliver Willis, a big-time Redskins fan, will have an aneurism if this comes to pass.
MORE AT: Welcome to the Now, Delusional Duck
Posted by: Greg at
01:39 PM
| Comments (103)
| Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.
apping an ordeal that spanned more than a decade, former University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian has reached a deal with prosecutors, agreeing to be deported after admitting involvement with a terrorist organization, an attorney involved in the negotiations said."My understanding was that he was to plead guilty" to conspiracy to provide material support to a terrorist organization, said William Moffitt, who represented Al-Arian until a judge allowed him to withdraw from the case last month. The deal calls for Al-Arian to receive a sentence roughly equal to the time he has served behind bars since he was arrested in February 2003, Moffitt said.
The remaining charges are to be dismissed. Moffitt said he and attorney Linda Moreno wrote the bulk of the agreement. "The vast majority of that deal was written on my desk," he said.
But not so fast, say the terrorist sympathizers from CAIR.
Ahmed Bedier, Tampa spokesman for the Council on American Islamic Relations, said Moffitt was wrong about the Al-Arian plea. Al-Arian did not agree to admit to any charges associated with terrorism, Bedier said."He stayed true to his convictions - he stayed true he wasn't going to plead to those issues," Bedier said. "There is no conspiracy to support terrorism."
Bedier said he could not reveal what charge Al-Arian agreed to, and he refused to reveal the source of his information.
Bedier convened a 7 p.m. news conference, saying he hoped to have Al-Arian's family there. They did not appear.
"Their lawyer would not allow them," Bedier said. He later said Al-Arian's family learned of the plea agreement Friday from a news report.
The evidence of al-Arian's guilt is compelling, though.
It remains clear that what country will receive this terrorist fundraiser.
Personally, I vote for Cuba -- Guantanamo Bay, to be exact.
Posted by: Greg at
11:33 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 332 words, total size 2 kb.
April 14, 2006
In the angry life of Maryscott O'Connor, the rage begins as soon as she opens her eyes and realizes that her president is still George W. Bush. The sun has yet to rise and her family is asleep, but no matter; as soon as the realization kicks in, O'Connor, 37, is out of bed and heading toward her computer.Out there, awaiting her building fury: the Angry Left, where O'Connor's reputation is as one of the angriest of all. "One long, sustained scream" is how she describes the writing she does for various Web logs, as she wonders what she should scream about this day.
She smokes a cigarette. Should it be about Bush, whom she considers "malevolent," a "sociopath" and "the Antichrist"? She smokes another cigarette. Should it be about Vice President Cheney, whom she thinks of as "Satan," or about Karl Rove, "the devil"? Should it be about the "evil" Republican Party, or the "weaselly, capitulating, self-aggrandizing, self-serving" Democrats, or the Catholic Church, for which she says "I have a special place in my heart . . . a burning, sizzling, putrescent place where the guilty suffer the tortures of the damned"?
Psychologically healthy people do not act that way. Clearly, this is a woman in need of some serious psychotropic medication -- no sane person burns with that sort of seething, corrosive hatred for those with whom they disagree. It isn't called Bush Derangement Syndrome for nothing.
In the end, I don't know what to feel. Should I be frightened of someone so rage-filled? Thankful that she has found some outlet other than violence through which to vent her rage? Or saddened that someone so in need of help is not getting it the thorazine and haldol she clearly needs.
Maybe I'll just settled for being sorry that the Washington Post didn't do a better job of picking a responsible, reasonable Lefty (like John Aravosis or Oliver Willis, for example) to feature. I think liberals in the blogosphere have been done a grave disservice with this piece.
MORE AT: Malcontent, FBIHOP, Jawa Report, Bluto, Iowa Voice, MahaBlog, Mudville Gazette, Political Pit Bull, Latino Issues, No Kool Aid Zone, Tennessee Guerilla Women, Beautiful Attrocities, Club for Growth, NewsHog, Six Meat Buffet, Gun Toting Liberal, Blogger's Blog, Leather Penguin, Seeing the Forest, Alternate Brain, Dr. Sanity, Cheat Seeking Missle
Posted by: Greg at
06:00 PM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 427 words, total size 4 kb.
j/k
16 Then the soldiers led Him away into the hall called Praetorium, and they called together the whole garrison.17 And they clothed Him with purple; and they twisted a crown of thorns, put it on His head,
18 and began to salute Him, “Hail, King of the Jews!”
19 Then they struck Him on the head with a reed and spat on Him; and bowing the knee, they worshiped Him.
20 And when they had mocked Him, they took the purple off Him, put His own clothes on Him, and led Him out to crucify Him.
21 Then they compelled a certain man, Simon a Cyrenian, the father of Alexander and Rufus, as he was coming out of the country and passing by, to bear His cross.
22 And they brought Him to the place Golgotha, which is translated, Place of a Skull.
23 Then they gave Him wine mingled with myrrh to drink, but He did not take it.
24 And when they crucified Him, they divided His garments, casting lots for them to determine what every man should take.
25 Now it was the third hour, and they crucified Him. 26 And the inscription of His accusation was written above:
THE KING OF THE JEWS.
27 With Him they also crucified two robbers, one on His right and the other on His left.
28 So the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And He was numbered with the transgressors.”
29 And those who passed by blasphemed Him, wagging their heads and saying, “Aha! You who destroy the temple and build it in three days,
30 save Yourself, and come down from the cross!”
31 Likewise the chief priests also, mocking among themselves with the scribes, said, “He saved others; Himself He cannot save.
32 Let the Christ, the King of Israel, descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe.”
Even those who were crucified with Him reviled Him.
33 Now when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour.34 And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?” which is translated, “My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?”
35 Some of those who stood by, when they heard that, said, “Look, He is calling for Elijah!”
36 Then someone ran and filled a sponge full of sour wine, put it on a reed, and offered it to Him to drink, saying, “Let Him alone; let us see if Elijah will come to take Him down.”
37 And Jesus cried out with a loud voice, and breathed His last.
38 Then the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.
39 So when the centurion, who stood opposite Him, saw that He cried out like this and breathed His last, he said, “Truly this Man was the Son of God!”
Posted by: Greg at
05:59 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 505 words, total size 3 kb.
Which takes us now to Northern Kentucky University. (H/T Michelle Malkin)
A professor at Northern Kentucky University said she invited students in one of her classes to destroy an anti-abortion display on campus Wednesday evening.NKU police are investigating the incident, in which 400 crosses were removed from the ground near University Center and thrown in trash cans. The crosses, meant to represent a cemetery for aborted fetuses, had been temporarily erected last weekend by a student Right to Life group with permission from NKU officials.
Public universities cannot ban such displays because they are a type of symbolic speech that has been protected by the U.S. Supreme Court.
Witnesses reported "a group of females of various ages" committing the vandalism about 5:30 p.m., said Dave Tobertge, administrative sergeant with the campus police.
Sally Jacobsen, a longtime professor in NKU's literature and language department, said the display was dismantled by about nine students in one of her graduate-level classes.
"I did, outside of class during the break, invite students to express their freedom-of-speech rights to destroy the display if they wished to," Jacobsen said.
Asked whether she participated in pulling up the crosses, the professor said, "I have no comment."
Such courage on the part of this so-called educator -- inciting criminal activity (not free speech) by her students and then refusing to answer a simple question about the extent of her own involvement. And I would like to remind the professor that property destruction is not free speech -- and she would not consider it to be so if someone ransacked her office, broke her car windows, or torched her house in protest of her vile act of speech suppression.
Why encourage/participate in this anti-freedom activity? Jacobsen explains it this way.
She said she was infuriated by the display, which she saw as intimidating and a "slap in the face" to women who might be making "the agonizing and very private decision to have an abortion.'"Jacobsen said it originally wasn't clear who had placed the crosses on campus.
She said that could make it appear that NKU endorsed the message.
Pulling up the crosses was similar to citizens taking down Nazi displays on Fountain Square, she said.
"Any violence perpetrated against that silly display was minor compared to how I felt when I saw it. Some of my students felt the same way, just outraged," Jacobsen said.
Let's break that down.
1) The display made her mad -- and her unstable emotional state trumps the rights of every other American.
2) Women are so emotionally delicate that they could be upset by the display's message and so the display needed togo -- but women have the strength of mind and will to be permitted to decide whether or not to take an inconvenient human life.
3) Right to life folks are Nazis and Nazis are entitled to no free speech rights (funny, that isn't what the First Amendment, the courts, and even the ACLU have to say on the matter).
4) The display's sponsorship was unclear, and someone might infer that private speech by students represented an official university position (this is false -- more on that in a moment).
Notice -- not a single legitimate justification for her violation of the rights of others. So much for freedom of speech and academic freedom!
And then there is that sponsorship issue.
In an e-mail sent to campus officials earlier this week and obtained by The Kentucky Post, Jacobsen demanded the display be removed immediately. She wrote that the crosses violated the separation of church and state because NKU is a state institution.
Jacobsen knew who had put up the display, and that the university had determined that the pro-life group had every right to do so under the laws and the Constitution of the United States. She further knew that the university could not legally censor the speech that offended her. So she took it upon herself to gather a group of vigilantes and engage in conduct which differed from that of a KKK lynch mob in degree but not in nature -- the violation of the civil rights of American citizens designed to intimidate others who might exercise those same rights.
Fortunately, NKU has a president and a dean who will not stand for such unAmerican conduct by a faculty member, tenured or not. Police are investigating, charges against those involved are promised, and support for the victims is being offered. Let's hope the result is the removal of this uncivil anti-libertarian from the faculty.
Oh, and to those who want to argue that the actions of Jacobsen and her band of anti-free-speech terrorists constitutes civil disobedience, I have one question -- would you consider it to be an act of free speech and civil disobedience if a group of men, hurt by their inability to stop the feticide of children they wanted, were to attack Sally Jacobsen with clubs in order to express their outrage at her activities and then justify it by claiming that "any violence perpetrated against that silly woman was minor compared to how we felt when we read of her actions"?
MORE AT: Texas Rainmaker, Flynn Files, Stop the ACLU, ATTOTWT, Where I Stand, Pollywog Creek, Darleen's Place, Bizzy Blog, Urban Grounds, Zero Point, Shock and Blog, Right Wing Nation, Freedom Folks, Expose the Left, Verum Serum, Pro-Life Blogs, Black Republican, Wizbang (twice), Mean Mr. Mustard, Jawa Report, Last Round, Right Minded, Yippee-Ki-Yay, Colossus of Rhodey
Posted by: Greg at
11:31 AM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1043 words, total size 9 kb.
April 13, 2006
Comments are always a treat (even from trolls and obsessives) -- especially from my regulars.
Trackbacks are great -- when trackbacks are functioning right.
But making the news -- anywhere -- is a treat.
So my serendipitous discovery of this story excited me even more than it surprised me.
How blogs helped keep the faith in AfghanistanBy - Sruthijith K K
The trial of Abdur Rahman, a 41-year-old Afghan facing execution under the Shariah law for converting into Christianity, was yet another incident involving the conflicts that have defined the polarised world after the events of September 11, 2001.
Since the issue violates the fundamental principles of liberal democracy, sharp reactions from the western world and bloggers do not come as a surprise. For the record, charges against Rahman have been dropped for now and the case has been returned to the prosecution for further investigation.
There is little disagreement that this move is a result of the enormous international outcry and appeals from Pope Benedict XVI, US President George W Bush, and many other heads of state. However, clerics have called for the death of Rahman and his safety remains a concern.
'Rhymes with Right' puts the news of his release in perspective. "Rahman is to be freed based not upon a human rights violation, not upon the principle that every person has the right to choose his or her own religion free of state coercion, but based upon technical questions about the evidence and insinuations about his sanity. This is, therefore, NOT a victory for human rights or religious freedom - it is a strategic retreat on the part of the Afghan government."
Many blogs are examining the verses in Koran and the hadiths that deal with apostates. "Though the only verses in the Koran which deal with apostasy do not outright condemn apostates to death, there are plenty of hadiths that do," Giraldus Cambrensis, writing in 'Western Resistance' concludes.
'Riehl World View' says: "I find this incredibly infuriating as so many American, as well as Christian men and women who fought to liberate Afghanistan. This is not what America fought for."
John Hinderacker, taking this line of argument from the American perspective further, thinks this is a "watershed moment". "The American people will bear a great deal of sacrifice, but only on behalf of principle. If, after our liberation of Afghanistan, a man may still be executed for being a Christian - or a Jew, there is no logical basis on which our government can continue to request the ultimate sacrifice from its most devoted supporters."
'Rhymes with Right' balances out the optimism the release has been received with. "There is still every chance of Abdul Rahman being prosecuted. Or what we might see is forbearance in this case, but the eventual execution of some other convert."
Either which way, blogosphere will closely follow developments in Afghanistan.
Wow -- major quotes, including the first and last word on the subject. Not only that, but I'm given precedence over John Hinderacker, whose keyboard I am not worthy to polish
Now when will Bill Bennett, Sean Hannity, and Hugh Hewitt be contacting me to appear on their shows?
Well, I can dream.
* * *
And here is where you can give me a little thrill by linking with your best work and trackbacking to this site. That's right, I'm trying to do a linkfest since it looks like the trackbacks may be working again. I won't limit the number of links, but do request that you practice reasonable restraint.
No spam. No porn. No problem.
Have a blessed Easter weekend.
Posted by: Greg at
06:21 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 633 words, total size 4 kb.
17 Now on the first day of the Feast of the Unleavened Bread the disciples came to Jesus, saying to Him, “Where do You want us to prepare for You to eat the Passover?”18 And He said, “Go into the city to a certain man, and say to him, ‘The Teacher says, “My time is at hand; I will keep the Passover at your house with My disciples.”’”
19 So the disciples did as Jesus had directed them; and they prepared the Passover.
20 When evening had come, He sat down with the twelve. 21 Now as they were eating, He said, “Assuredly, I say to you, one of you will betray Me.”
22 And they were exceedingly sorrowful, and each of them began to say to Him, “Lord, is it I?”
23 He answered and said, “He who dipped his hand with Me in the dish will betray Me.
24 The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.”
25 Then Judas, who was betraying Him, answered and said, “Rabbi, is it I?”
He said to him, “You have said it.”
26 And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, blessed and broke it, and gave it to the disciples and said, “Take, eat; this is My body.”27 Then He took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you.
28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
29 But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in My Father’s kingdom.”
30 And when they had sung a hymn, they went out to the Mount of Olives.
Posted by: Greg at
05:59 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 343 words, total size 2 kb.
Officials at the Ohio State University are investigating an OSU Mansfield librarian for “sexual harassment” after he recommended four conservative books for a freshman reading program. ADF has demanded that OSU cease its frivolous investigation, yet the university is pressing forward, claiming that it takes the charges “seriously.”“Universities are one of the most hostile places for Christians and conservatives in America,” said ADF Senior Legal Counsel David French, who heads ADF’s Center for Academic Freedom. “It is shameful that OSU would investigate a Christian librarian for simply recommending books that are at odds with the prevailing politics of the university.”
Scott Savage, who serves as a reference librarian for the university, suggested four best-selling conservative books for freshman reading in his role as a member of OSU MansfieldÂ’s First Year Reading Experience Committee. The four books he suggested were The Marketing of Evil by David Kupelian, The Professors by David Horowitz, Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis by Bat YeÂ’or, and It Takes a Family by Senator Rick Santorum. Savage made the recommendations after other committee members had suggested a series of books with a left-wing perspective, by authors such as Jimmy Carter and Maria Shriver.
Savage was put under “investigation” by OSU’s Office of Human Resources after three professors filed a complaint of discrimination and harassment against him, saying that the book suggestions made them feel “unsafe.” The complaint came after the OSU Mansfield faculty voted without dissent to file charges against Savage. The faculty later voted to allow the individual professors to file charges.
If the facts as presented are, in fact, accurate, then this complaint is a serious breach of academic freedom. Furthermore, if the professors in question are threatened or made to feel "unsafe" by the mere suggestion that students be exposed to ideas other than their own, then it strikes me that they need to be terminated forthwith as unfit for membership in the University community.
MORE AT Instapundit, Volokh, Ed Driscoll, Ace of Spades
Posted by: Greg at
04:27 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 378 words, total size 3 kb.
A Tucson High Magnet School student will tell state lawmakers next week that she was forced by school officials to listen to a pro-immigrant speech.Senior Mon-yee Fung,17, voluntarily attended an assembly where co-founder of the United Farm Workers Union Dolores Huerta spoke, but could not leave after Huerta began saying "Republicans hate Latinos."
"I wanted to listen to what they had to say, but all they had to say was hate speak," said Fung, head of the school's Teenage Republicans Club. "They're saying that I don't like Mexicans or that I don't try to understand what they're doing, but I am trying to understand."
State Rep. Jonathan Paton, R-Tucson, wants Fung to tell her story to Fox News today at 5 p.m.
"She was forced to listen to a political speech for over 40 minutes," Paton said. "To me that's a real problem because we shouldn't have the schools as a forum for political speech. They should be a forum for education."
Now her attendance clearly was not voluntary, based upon this admission by the principal of the school.
Tucson High Principal Abel Morado said he was unaware of the incident involving Fung."I will take the young lady's word for it," he said. "It may have been a supervision issue. We ask teachers to properly supervise their students during an assembly and sit with their class."
Students were told they could go to the assembly or the library, but the library locked because of miscommunication.
"I did learn after the fact that the library was closed," Morado said. "It may have been that the librarian chose to go to the assembly. That's my responsibility."
In other words, you could choose to attend the assembly -- or attend the assembly. So you see, there really was no free choice on Fung's part. Besides, if attendance was voluntary at this political event, doesn't that include the right to leave in protest of the hateful and malicious falsehoods being spewed by the speaker?
Now I have no problem with the choise of speaker -- Dolores Huerta is a figure of historical importance in contemprary Hispanic history -- but I do believe she crossed a line in this setting. That Huerta did not see this is troubling -- and that she remains unapologetic for her defamatory comments is more disturbing still.
Huerta said she was invited to speak at Tucson High as part of the effort to keep students in school and disagreed with Paton's assertion that political speech has no place in school."This is a terrific opportunity for young people to learn what the democratic process is about, the way that bills are passed," Huerta said. "I explained this whole procedure to the students."
Huerta said her "Republicans hate Latinos" comment was based on the number of anti-immigration bills sponsored by Republicans.
"Large numbers of the Republican Party are anti-immigrant or anti-Latino," she said. "I can justify that."
Wrong, Ms. Huerta -- there are large segments of the GOP that are anti-wetback, just like Cesar Chavez was. You know, the guy who you worked with all those years in founding and runing the UFW. Chavez recognized that those who come to this country illegally depress the wages of citizens and legal immigrants, and that illegals are exploited by unethical employers. So unless it is your contention that Cesar Chavez was anti-immigrant or anti-Latino, your statement is way out of line.
I'm also cuious -- precisely who invited Huerta to speak? the article does not say, and it would appear that the school administration was not involved. After all, if they were, they surely would have brought in another speaker to provide the other side, in the interest of intellectual honesty.
Or maybe not.
Morado said the school is a "wonderful venue" to see the opposing sides of an issue, but acknowledged that no effort has been made on his part to bring in somebody who supports the controversial immigration bill, HR 4437."I don't see that it is my role to turn around and say that "OK, we've had this speaker, now let's turn around and get this speaker," he said. "If there was somebody in favor of that and they wanted to speak at Tucson High, I wouldn't oppose that if my students invited them or if my teachers invited them."
Excuse me? You don't see it as your role to provide a balanced look at a hot-button issue when you have brought in a speaker from one side of the issue? Are you running a school, or an indoctrination center. Never mind, sir, you don't need to answer -- the above makes it quite clear what the honest answer would be. Not that you would give us an honest answer.
Oh, and while we are at it, maybe you could address this little issue of censorship.
Flung also said she was asked to remove a poster recruiting young Republicans because it was "too inflammatory."The poster read "Be an American, join the Teenage Republican Club."
I get it -- "GOP=PATRIOTIC" is inflamatory, but ""GOP=RACIST" is just fine. Sounds to me like there needs to be a housecleaning at this school -- starting with the principal.
Posted by: Greg at
04:15 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 908 words, total size 5 kb.
Well, guess what – MTV has engaged in blasphemy against Jesus during the holiest of Christian seasons. Will there be violence?
We already know the answer.
As Christians around the world prepare for Easter, magazine readers in Germany were confronted this week by full-page advertisements depicting Jesus, wearing a crown of thorns but descended from the cross, enjoying a television program."Laughing rather than hanging around," (Lachen statt rumhaengen) reads the tagline of the ad, which has drawn strong protests in Germany, where two-thirds of the population identifies as Christian.
The ad promotes MTV's plan to broadcast a cartoon lampooning the pope and Vatican hierarchy. The series, Popetown, was considered too controversial to be aired in Britain, and it caused an uproar in the one country where it has appeared, New Zealand.
Coming at a time when the dust has yet to settle from the furor over newspaper cartoons caricaturing Mohammed, the row has prompted some Germans to ask why their faith should be an easy target.
The Deutsche Welle broadcaster quoted Joachim Herrmann of the Christian Social Union party as saying that MTV would have thought twice before poking fun in a similar way at Muslims.
No, they would not have thought twice. MTV would not have dared engage in similar conduct regarding Muhammad – or Allah.
German Christians are outraged.
A German Christian magazine, Verse One, has instituted an online protest and boycott campaign."After the events surrounding the Mohammed cartoons we had thought there was agreement that media should show consideration for the religious feelings of believers, whether Muslims, Jews, Buddhists or Christians," said Verse One publisher Birgit Kelle.
"Obviously we were mistaken."
Kelle, a Protestant, said the issue did not concern "our Catholic brothers and sisters" alone. If Christians did not defend themselves - with arguments, not force - "this will never stop."
Ms. Kelle, there was no agreement to show consideration for the believers of any religion except Islam. Christian feelings were never even a consideration, only Muslim feelings? Why? Because we Christians do not engage in murderous behavior towards those who dare dissent from our religious beliefs. Offending Muslims, on the other hand, can be fatal.
Does MTV have the right to show this insulting series, and to run this blasphemous ad? Yes, it does.
But we have the right to retaliate economically. Let’s bring down MTV and its corporate parent, Viacom.
UPDATE: We really do need to go after Viacom, which is the parent company of both MTV and Comedy Central. The company's hypocrisy regarding treatment of Jesus and Muhammad is outrageous!
Banned by Comedy Central from showing an image of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, the creators of "South Park" skewered their own network for hypocrisy in the cartoon's most recent episode.The comedy _ in an episode aired during Holy Week for Christians _ instead featured an image of Jesus Christ defecating on President Bush and the American flag.
In an elaborately constructed two-part episode of their Peabody Award-winning cartoon, "South Park" creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker intended to comment on the controversy created by a Danish newspaper's publishing of caricatures of Muhammad. Muslims consider any physical representation of their prophet to be blasphemous.
When the cartoons were reprinted in newspapers worldwide in January and February, it sparked a wave of protests primarily in Islamic countries.
Parker and Stone were angered when told by Comedy Central several weeks ago that they could not run an image of Muhammad, according to a person close to the show who didn't want to be identified because of the issue's sensitivity.
The network's decision was made over concerns for public safety, the person said.
Comedy Central said in a statement issued Thursday: "In light of recent world events, we feel we made the right decision." Its executives would not comment further.
In other words, Vacom/Comedy Central is unwilling to risk offending Muslims by showing their false prophet Muhammad, but are more than willing to offend Christians by allowing Jesus to be depicted in a patently offensive manner in the midst of Holy Week, only a few hours before the beginning of the Easter Triduum! This only serves to underscore the utter moral bankruptcy of the company, coming as it does at the same time as Viacon/MTV is running the above ad in Germany.
Viacom Delenda Est!
A CLARIFICATION: I was contacted via email by someone asking why I am not angry with Matt Stone and Trey Parker, who chose to create and include the blasphemous depiction of Jesus (which also insulted the flag and the president) in the episode. I'll be honest, I'm not real happy about what they did, but I understand their purpose. They gave Comedy Central the opportunity to treat the religion of most Americans with the same sensitivity they show the religion of America's enemies. Comedy Central proved their point beautifully with its willingness to broadcast the much-more-offensive image of Jesus immediately after censoring the tame Muhammad image. There was, I must say, no other way to make the point plain to all but the most dhimmified individuals. I'm therefore willing to give Stone and Parker a pass on this one.
On the other hand, the decisions of the Viacom dhimmis to run the Jesus segment after censoring the Muhammad segment cannot be justified or excused -- especially when taken in context with the German Jesus ad (and the series it advertised) run by Viacom/MTV.
Viacom Delenda Est!
MORE AT: Jawa Report, Not Exactly Rocket Science, Everything Between, Flying Assmonkey, Federal Republic, Fyber Journal, Hugh Hewitt, Flopping Aces, Burden of Proof, Volokh (times three), Michelle Malkin, WAmbulance, Daimnation, Freedom for Some, Balance Sheet, MVRWC, Ed Driscoll, A Tic in the Mind's Eye, Political Pit Bull, Iowa Voice, Capital Region People, Captain's Quarters, OTB, Wall Street Cafe, SFPH, Small Dead Animals, Tammy Bruce, Freedom Watch, Coalition of the Swilling, Publius Rendevous, Junk Yard Blog, California Conservative, Protein Wisdom, Bryan's basement, Pajamas Media, Sammenhold, AListReview, Verum Serum, Pretend Pundit, Bad Example, American Princess, Right Wing News, bRight & Early, Media Blog, The Anchoress, OpFor, Where I Stand, Wizbang, Dental Blog, Sister Toldjah, PoliPundit, Gateway Pundit, Blue Star Chronicles, Jawa Report (again), Dread Pundit Bluto, Vince Aut Morire
Posted by: Greg at
11:13 AM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1071 words, total size 12 kb.
Well, guess what – MTV has engaged in blasphemy against Jesus during the holiest of Christian seasons. Will there be violence?
We already know the answer.
As Christians around the world prepare for Easter, magazine readers in Germany were confronted this week by full-page advertisements depicting Jesus, wearing a crown of thorns but descended from the cross, enjoying a television program."Laughing rather than hanging around," (Lachen statt rumhaengen) reads the tagline of the ad, which has drawn strong protests in Germany, where two-thirds of the population identifies as Christian.
The ad promotes MTV's plan to broadcast a cartoon lampooning the pope and Vatican hierarchy. The series, Popetown, was considered too controversial to be aired in Britain, and it caused an uproar in the one country where it has appeared, New Zealand.
Coming at a time when the dust has yet to settle from the furor over newspaper cartoons caricaturing Mohammed, the row has prompted some Germans to ask why their faith should be an easy target.
The Deutsche Welle broadcaster quoted Joachim Herrmann of the Christian Social Union party as saying that MTV would have thought twice before poking fun in a similar way at Muslims.
No, they would not have thought twice. MTV would not have dared engage in similar conduct regarding Muhammad – or Allah.
German Christians are outraged.
A German Christian magazine, Verse One, has instituted an online protest and boycott campaign."After the events surrounding the Mohammed cartoons we had thought there was agreement that media should show consideration for the religious feelings of believers, whether Muslims, Jews, Buddhists or Christians," said Verse One publisher Birgit Kelle.
"Obviously we were mistaken."
Kelle, a Protestant, said the issue did not concern "our Catholic brothers and sisters" alone. If Christians did not defend themselves - with arguments, not force - "this will never stop."
Ms. Kelle, there was no agreement to show consideration for the believers of any religion except Islam. Christian feelings were never even a consideration, only Muslim feelings? Why? Because we Christians do not engage in murderous behavior towards those who dare dissent from our religious beliefs. Offending Muslims, on the other hand, can be fatal.
Does MTV have the right to show this insulting series, and to run this blasphemous ad? Yes, it does.
But we have the right to retaliate economically. LetÂ’s bring down MTV and its corporate parent, Viacom.
UPDATE: We really do need to go after Viacom, which is the parent company of both MTV and Comedy Central. The company's hypocrisy regarding treatment of Jesus and Muhammad is outrageous!
Banned by Comedy Central from showing an image of the Islamic prophet Muhammad, the creators of "South Park" skewered their own network for hypocrisy in the cartoon's most recent episode.The comedy _ in an episode aired during Holy Week for Christians _ instead featured an image of Jesus Christ defecating on President Bush and the American flag.
In an elaborately constructed two-part episode of their Peabody Award-winning cartoon, "South Park" creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker intended to comment on the controversy created by a Danish newspaper's publishing of caricatures of Muhammad. Muslims consider any physical representation of their prophet to be blasphemous.
When the cartoons were reprinted in newspapers worldwide in January and February, it sparked a wave of protests primarily in Islamic countries.
Parker and Stone were angered when told by Comedy Central several weeks ago that they could not run an image of Muhammad, according to a person close to the show who didn't want to be identified because of the issue's sensitivity.
The network's decision was made over concerns for public safety, the person said.
Comedy Central said in a statement issued Thursday: "In light of recent world events, we feel we made the right decision." Its executives would not comment further.
In other words, Vacom/Comedy Central is unwilling to risk offending Muslims by showing their false prophet Muhammad, but are more than willing to offend Christians by allowing Jesus to be depicted in a patently offensive manner in the midst of Holy Week, only a few hours before the beginning of the Easter Triduum! This only serves to underscore the utter moral bankruptcy of the company, coming as it does at the same time as Viacon/MTV is running the above ad in Germany.
Viacom Delenda Est!
A CLARIFICATION: I was contacted via email by someone asking why I am not angry with Matt Stone and Trey Parker, who chose to create and include the blasphemous depiction of Jesus (which also insulted the flag and the president) in the episode. I'll be honest, I'm not real happy about what they did, but I understand their purpose. They gave Comedy Central the opportunity to treat the religion of most Americans with the same sensitivity they show the religion of America's enemies. Comedy Central proved their point beautifully with its willingness to broadcast the much-more-offensive image of Jesus immediately after censoring the tame Muhammad image. There was, I must say, no other way to make the point plain to all but the most dhimmified individuals. I'm therefore willing to give Stone and Parker a pass on this one.
On the other hand, the decisions of the Viacom dhimmis to run the Jesus segment after censoring the Muhammad segment cannot be justified or excused -- especially when taken in context with the German Jesus ad (and the series it advertised) run by Viacom/MTV.
Viacom Delenda Est!
MORE AT: Jawa Report, Not Exactly Rocket Science, Everything Between, Flying Assmonkey, Federal Republic, Fyber Journal, Hugh Hewitt, Flopping Aces, Burden of Proof, Volokh (times three), Michelle Malkin, WAmbulance, Daimnation, Freedom for Some, Balance Sheet, MVRWC, Ed Driscoll, A Tic in the Mind's Eye, Political Pit Bull, Iowa Voice, Capital Region People, Captain's Quarters, OTB, Wall Street Cafe, SFPH, Small Dead Animals, Tammy Bruce, Freedom Watch, Coalition of the Swilling, Publius Rendevous, Junk Yard Blog, California Conservative, Protein Wisdom, Bryan's basement, Pajamas Media, Sammenhold, AListReview, Verum Serum, Pretend Pundit, Bad Example, American Princess, Right Wing News, bRight & Early, Media Blog, The Anchoress, OpFor, Where I Stand, Wizbang, Dental Blog, Sister Toldjah, PoliPundit, Gateway Pundit, Blue Star Chronicles, Jawa Report (again), Dread Pundit Bluto, Vince Aut Morire
Posted by: Greg at
11:13 AM
| Comments (21)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1078 words, total size 12 kb.
A 19-year-old Turkish man has been jailed for nine years and three months by a German court for shooting his sister in a so-called "honour killing".
Ayhan Surucu had confessed to shooting his sister Hatun Surucu, 23, at a bus stop in a Berlin suburb last year.Two other brothers were cleared of charges of conspiring to murder her.
Prosecutors said the brothers felt dishonoured by their sister, who lived on her own with her son after leaving a cousin she had been forced to marry.The death of the 23-year-old shocked Germany and led to street protests by Turkish women.
Her own brother – in order to protect the “honor†of his family from the “disgrace†of his sister choosing to live in a manner not condoned by the family’s religion.
The Berlin court's presiding judge Michael Degreif said Hatun Surucu was killed "because she lived her life as she saw fit" and had adopted Western ideas of sexual equality, the AFP news agency reports.Her killer, Ayhan Surucu, had told the court he shot his sister because he disapproved of her lifestyle and her morals, but added that he regretted his actions.
He said she infuriated him by saying that she had the right to live as she pleased and to sleep with whom she wanted."It was too much for me. I grabbed the pistol and pulled the trigger," he told the court in September. "I don't even understand what I did anymore."
We understand – because thousands of women are murdered every year by members of your faith for precisely the same reason.
* * *
Here we have another example of Islamic frustration with basic human rights norms.
Indonesian police asked Playboy magazine on Thursday to stop publishing its local edition in the capital out of fears it could inflame Muslim anger, police and the magazine said.Ponti Carolus, the director of Playboy's publishing company, said the magazine would think about the request.
"Give us 24 hours and we will let you know our decision," he told reporters at city police headquarters after meeting the police chief. "We are very glad to have input from the Jakarta police. It was quite wise."
Previously, police and government officials said that there were no laws to ban the magazine, which does not feature any nudity and is no more risque than scores of other local and foreign publications already for sale in the world's most populous Muslim country.
Can you imagine the police in Indonesia – or any country on earth – ordering a publication to shut down because Christians are offended?
We all know the answer there.
Because Christians do not regularly murder those who violate Christian religious beliefs.
So I have to ask, based upon these two stories -- is Islam compatible with the civilized world? If not, will the civilized world be required to force Islam to change -- or to treat it like a cancer?
Posted by: Greg at
11:12 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 511 words, total size 3 kb.
A 19-year-old Turkish man has been jailed for nine years and three months by a German court for shooting his sister in a so-called "honour killing".
Ayhan Surucu had confessed to shooting his sister Hatun Surucu, 23, at a bus stop in a Berlin suburb last year.Two other brothers were cleared of charges of conspiring to murder her.
Prosecutors said the brothers felt dishonoured by their sister, who lived on her own with her son after leaving a cousin she had been forced to marry.The death of the 23-year-old shocked Germany and led to street protests by Turkish women.
Her own brother – in order to protect the “honor” of his family from the “disgrace” of his sister choosing to live in a manner not condoned by the family’s religion.
The Berlin court's presiding judge Michael Degreif said Hatun Surucu was killed "because she lived her life as she saw fit" and had adopted Western ideas of sexual equality, the AFP news agency reports.Her killer, Ayhan Surucu, had told the court he shot his sister because he disapproved of her lifestyle and her morals, but added that he regretted his actions.
He said she infuriated him by saying that she had the right to live as she pleased and to sleep with whom she wanted."It was too much for me. I grabbed the pistol and pulled the trigger," he told the court in September. "I don't even understand what I did anymore."
We understand – because thousands of women are murdered every year by members of your faith for precisely the same reason.
* * *
Here we have another example of Islamic frustration with basic human rights norms.
Indonesian police asked Playboy magazine on Thursday to stop publishing its local edition in the capital out of fears it could inflame Muslim anger, police and the magazine said.Ponti Carolus, the director of Playboy's publishing company, said the magazine would think about the request.
"Give us 24 hours and we will let you know our decision," he told reporters at city police headquarters after meeting the police chief. "We are very glad to have input from the Jakarta police. It was quite wise."
Previously, police and government officials said that there were no laws to ban the magazine, which does not feature any nudity and is no more risque than scores of other local and foreign publications already for sale in the world's most populous Muslim country.
Can you imagine the police in Indonesia – or any country on earth – ordering a publication to shut down because Christians are offended?
We all know the answer there.
Because Christians do not regularly murder those who violate Christian religious beliefs.
So I have to ask, based upon these two stories -- is Islam compatible with the civilized world? If not, will the civilized world be required to force Islam to change -- or to treat it like a cancer?
Posted by: Greg at
11:12 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 514 words, total size 3 kb.
Two former staff members of U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr., D-Michigan, say the longtime Detroit congressman made them baby-sit his children, run errands and work on political campaigns while they were on his congressional payroll.Sydney Rooks, whom Conyers hired as a legal adviser in his Detroit office, recalls the lawmaker brought his two young sons into her office several times, saying, "Rooks, they're your responsibility for right now. I'll be back later."
She said later could be a few minutes or an hour. "Later could be frantically calling around trying to find him because it was now 8 or 9 p.m. or later in the evening and not knowing what to do with the children," she said.
Conyers has even used his staff to house sit and care for his children for weeks on end while he and his wife were out of town. And there are also reports of these government employees being set to work on his campaign and the city council campaign of his wife.
Which party is the party of privilege?
MORE AT GOPBloggers
Posted by: Greg at
11:07 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 1 kb.
The White House is looking at a list of cost-cutting candidates to head the Office of Management and Budget, and Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, may be on it.The former House majority leader, who announced he will resign from Congress and is under a state indictment on political money laundering charges, is listed as a possible replacement for Josh Bolten, the U.S. News and World Report said.
Bolten has been named incoming White House chief of staff.
Other candidates are familiar with the Bush administration, including Deputy OMB Director Joel Kaplan, the head of the National Economic Council, and Rob Portman, current trade czar.
Wouldn’t it be fun to watch all the apoplectic Democrats?
Posted by: Greg at
11:05 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.
The White House is looking at a list of cost-cutting candidates to head the Office of Management and Budget, and Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, may be on it.The former House majority leader, who announced he will resign from Congress and is under a state indictment on political money laundering charges, is listed as a possible replacement for Josh Bolten, the U.S. News and World Report said.
Bolten has been named incoming White House chief of staff.
Other candidates are familiar with the Bush administration, including Deputy OMB Director Joel Kaplan, the head of the National Economic Council, and Rob Portman, current trade czar.
WouldnÂ’t it be fun to watch all the apoplectic Democrats?
Posted by: Greg at
11:05 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.
April 12, 2006
Terrorist groups, which for years have used the Internet and its various tools to organize and communicate, are paying more attention to addressing security and privacy concerns similar to those of other Web users, counterterrorism experts say.The Internet has long been a convenient gathering place for radical Islamists advocating violence against Western influences, known as jihadists. Through online chat, e-mail and Web postings, communities of people have relied on one another for advice, political debate, even movie reviews and biographical information on suicide bombers and religious leaders.
Recently, postings on jihadist Web sites have expressed increasing concern about spyware, password protection, and surveillance on chat rooms and instant-messaging systems.
One forum recently posted a guide for Internet safety and anonymity on the Internet, advising readers of ways to circumvent hackers or government officials.
"The Shortened Way of How to be Cautious; To the User of the Jihadi Forums, In the Name of Allah, the most Gracious and Merciful" was posted last month by an al-Qaeda-affiliated group calling itself the Global Islamic Media Front and was translated by the SITE Institute, a group that tracks international terrorist groups.
Good job, liberals -- you've helped make it harder for Americna intelligence agencies to save American lives. And thanks, media folks, for tipping the terrorists off that they need to increase their security!
Posted by: Greg at
10:53 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 248 words, total size 2 kb.
The Smithsonian leaks free richness, the kind of palatial, spatial dripping wealth probably enjoyed by emperors who walked barefoot on such cool marble floors. Fattened by life, they no doubt listened to the same delicate trickle of waterfalls in indoor gardens and admired paintings by the masters.But this kind of opulence is, in these museums, open to the common person. So you wander about the various Smithsonian facilities because you can. Because the museums are free. Open to anybody in the world. You wonder as you wander what kind of people come here in the middle of the day and what do they seek? Would they still come if it cost them a buck, as a member of Congress recently proposed? Simple math: With 25 million visitors a year, if you charged a dollar each for admission, you could raise $25 million for a great institution in need of cash. There are, after all, renovation projects to pay for, like the one at the National Museum of American History, which this fall is closing its doors for almost two years for major makeover.
But how would the experience of dropping in on one of the museums of the Smithsonian in the middle of a workday change if there were a cost attached?
An excellent discussion continues in the rest of the article.
Posted by: Greg at
10:49 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.
Under siege by Republicans, a Limestone County teacher has been asked by Democratic leaders to withdraw his Democratic candidacy for a state House seat amid allegations that he showed students a vulgar video of President Bush.The Alabama Democratic Party, in a statement Wednesday, said the withdrawal was discussed with Steve White, a candidate for the House District 4 seat, "days ago, prior to Republican protests."
It also said White had resigned his position as a local party official. But there was no immediate word from White on whether he will drop out of the race.
"The safety and welfare of Limestone County's children and their families is our number one concern right now, not politics," Alabama Democratic Party Chairman Joe Turnham said in the statement.
Turnham said that if the allegations against White are proven true, he will face "appropriate consequences" by the party committee.
The statement came amid GOP calls for Democrats to rebuke the teacher and for school officials to fire him.
The Alabama Republican Party in a statement released Wednesday asked Turnham to rebuke White. Accused of showing the vulgar video about Bush and other conservatives, White first was issued a reprimand; he was put on leave after another complaint, the details of which have not been disclosed by school officials.
Before Turnham released his statement, state GOP Chairman Twinkle Andress Cavanaugh issued one denouncing Democratic inaction. "By remaining silent, Joe Turnham is, in essence, condoning what Steve White did, and that says a lot about the Alabama Democrat Party," she said.
I wonder what "appropriate consequences" would be. After all, the party would have no way of forcing him off the ballot prior to the primary, nor if he were to officially win the nomination. Could it be that they are just blowing smoke as a matter of "saving face"?
And is it a matter of concern for the children in White's classes, or that he is alleged to have shown a video to his students which mocked Bill Clinton?
Now let's hope that the school board has the guts to fire Steve White.
MORE AT: Michelle Malkin, SpunkyHomeSchool, Right Wing Nation, AListReview, J Rob's House of Opinion, Church and State, HoodaThunk?, Freedom for Some, Freedom Folks, Once More Into The Breach, Daily Musings, Moonbattery, Brutally Honest, Aldaynet, Right Voices, Independent Conservative, Expose the Left, Michelle Malkin (again), Media Crunch, Church and State (again), Skilletfan, Mike's America, Strata-Sphere
Posted by: Greg at
03:45 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 454 words, total size 5 kb.
Let's consider this case from Malaysia, wher ethe Becket Fund is trying to defend the right of a Malay woman to adopt the religion of her choice, legally marry, and have children.
On Thursday, April 13, 2006, MalaysiaÂ’s Federal Court will hear the case of Azlina binti Jailani, an ethnic Malay who formally converted from Islam to Christianity in 1998. That same year, she took the sacrament of marriage with a Catholic man. Her joyful demeanor prompted her to change her name, and today she is known as Lina Joy.The Civil Marriage provision of the 1976 Law Reform Act prohibits Muslims from solemnising or registering marriage under civil law. Because Lina Joy bore a Muslim name, the Civil Registry of Marriages would not accept her application for marriage. Lina eventually managed to have her legal name changed. However, her identity card stated that she was a Muslim pursuant to a new regulation, despite her affirmative declaration that she was a Christian. The designation could not be removed until Lina Joy obtain an order from the Syariah Court stating that she had become an apostate.
Lina Joy took the matter to the civil courts. The court of first instance dismissed Lina JoyÂ’s application on two main grounds. First, Malays could not renounce Islam at all because they were defined by the Federal Constituion to be persons of the Islamic faith. According to the High Court, a MalayÂ’s religion and beliefs are determined by birth, not by choice.
The second ground was jurisdictional. The High Court ruled a conversion out of Islam is a religious matter that could only be dealt with by the Syariah Court. The High Court based its finding on Article 121, which states that the civil courts “shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any matter within the jurisdiction of the Syariah courts.”
Lina Joy appealed to the Court of Appeal, which dismissed her case. On April 13, the Federal Court will hold a hearing, where The Becket Fund's Director of International Advocacy, Angela C. Wu, will join her team of Malaysian lawyers and advocates, to decide whether or not to accept Lina’s last chance of appeal. If the Federal Court does not accept the case, Lina will officially and forever be considered Muslim—at least, until the Syariah Court sees fit to recognize her conversion, and designate her an apostate—legally labeling her as someone who defies God.
Significantly, Lina Joy never applied to the Syariah Court to recognize her conversion, and instead has applied to the civil courts for marital recognition without a Syariah determination of her faith. She argues that it is not the place of any court to tell her what she believes.
Lina Joy, 42, is fearful to start a family, because any children would be designated Muslim. They could then be taken away from her because they are not raised in the Muslim faith. Further, they would potentially be evidence of adultery.
With Lina JoyÂ’s hearing next week, Malaysia is once again at a critical point in deciding whether constitutional or Syariah will prevail, and whether it is indeed up to the state, de jure and de facto, to tell Malaysians what they believe.
Constitutionally designated as a member of Islam, with no legal ability to convert without a ruling from a Muslim court -- sounds like compulsion tome. In addition, such a ruling would still arguably leave her cildren designated as Muslims, which would mean she and her husband could not legally raise them or pass on their religion to them. Such a system certainly sounds like one which compels one to remain a Muslim -- even though we are told that there is no compuslion permitted under Islamic law.
And then there is this story from Saudi Arabia, in which the human right to practice one's religion and pass it on to one's children is denied by law.
A Catholic Indian priest was yesterday forced to leave Saudi Arabia. He was discovered by the religious police as he organized a prayer meeting in the lead-up to Easter. Arrested on 5 April, he remained in police custody for four days and on Saturday 8th April he left for India. The practice of any religion other than Islam is forbidden in Saudi Arabia. Meetings held privately in peopleÂ’s homes, among friends, are also banned.The priest, Fr George Joshua, belongs to the Malankara rite of Kerala (India). His visit to Catholic Indians in the Saudi Kingdom was planned with his bishopÂ’s permission.
On 5 April, Fr George had just celebrated mass in a private house when seven religious policemen (muttawa) broke into the house together with two ordinary policemen. The police arrested the priest and another person.
The Saudi religious police are well known for their ruthlessness; they often torture believers of other religions who are arrested.
AsiaNews sources said there were around 400,000 Indian Catholics in Saudi Arabia who were denied pastoral care. Catholic foreigners in the country number at least one million: none of them can participate in mass while they are in Saudi Arabia. Catechism for their children – nearly 100,000 – is banned.
Often, for feasts like Easter and Christmas, Catholics plan holidays in the Emirates, Bahrain or Abu Dhabi, where at least for once, they are free to attend mass.
No right to worship. No right to teach their faith to their children. And for Muslims, no right to convert. The mere act of holding a religious service -- in private in the privacy of one's home -- is denied. At least if one is not a Muslim. Sounds like a set of regulations designed to coerce folks to accept Islam. In the land where the Koran was allegedly divinely given to Muhammad.
It's very hard, of course, for Christians to preach among the Muslims of the world. Look at the lengths that these missionaries are going to keep from offending the Muslims where they are working.
Carlos and Viviana were among five people from the Baptist University of the Americas to go on a mission trip three years ago to a West African country. The majority of the population is Muslim and includes people of Arab and African descent.A missionary couple from Mexico who used to live in San Antonio are there permanently. The BUA declined to give their names for concern that the government would crack down on them. They also asked that the country not be identified.
The couple sends emails to friends in the U.S. in secret code. They took Muslim names. In fact, they gave all the visiting members on the mission trip Muslim names. The cross-cultural techniques have reportedly worked with about 20 converts from Islam to Christianity.
The couple entered the country, where poverty is pervasive and slavery still exists, by offering agricultural help.
Who knows what would happen to them if they dared be open about their missionary activity. Muslims kill Christian missionaries around the world every year. It is a mission field in which martyrdom remains a real possibility.
And, of course, guess who objects to Christian missionaries trying to spread their faith among the Muslims of the world? Why, the friendly folks from CAIR, who claim that Islam is compatible with religious freedom!
This approach, even if led by Latinos, still draws skepticism from some Muslims who have seen a variety of methods by Christians seeking the same objective of conversion, said Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a Muslim advocacy group in Washington.Men growing beards. Women wearing head coverings. Bibles placed on wooden stands like Korans. Churches built to resemble mosques.
"It's a new twist on an old approach," Hooper said. "They want to appear as Muslim as possible to kind of blur the lines."
Hooper said he doesn't believe humanitarian help from evangelical mission groups is unconditional.
"If the Bible is handed out with a sack of rice, they're going to take the sack of rice and the Bible if their kids are starving," he said. "We have no problem with someone coming to a Muslim and saying, 'I think Christianity is better.' But we object to going into a vulnerable population with a disproportionate power relationship."
Hooper should remember that Islam has historically been spread not by preaching and good works, but by the sword.
I begin to wonder if, given the actions of religious and civil authorities in majority Muslim countries and Islam's demand that it be given primacy over all other religious faiths, Islam itself should be treated like Fascism, Nazism and Communism -- as a totalitarian ideology that must be suppressed in the name of defending human rights and dignity.
Posted by: Greg at
12:04 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1491 words, total size 9 kb.
Dancers perform as they hold capsules of uranium hexaflouride, or UF6 gas during a ceremony in Mashhad, Iran's holiest city, Tuesday, April 11, 2006. Iran has successfully enriched uranium for the first time, a landmark in its quest to develop nuclear fuel, hard-line President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday, although he insisted his country does not aim to develop atomic weapons. In a nationally televised speech, Ahmadinejad called on the West "not to cause an everlasting hatred in the hearts of Iranians" by trying to force Iran to abandon uranium enrichment. (AP Photo/Mehr News Agency)
Will the world do what must be done? Will the US be forced to act in isolation? Or will we stand by while another rogue regime gains Weapons of Mass Destruction?
Posted by: Greg at
10:26 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 163 words, total size 1 kb.
In Waynesville, a small county seat in the mountains of western North Carolina, people whispered about the three older men who lived together south of town.They were lovers, and there were rumors that the trio had turned a room in their house into a dungeon where they filmed sadomasochistic sex scenes — and then posted them on the Internet.
Someone asked the local sheriff to investigate the men, but his officers determined their activities, although unorthodox, were perfectly legal.
Last month, however, the men were arrested on charges that shocked the community.Authorities say they performed castrations and other types of genital surgeries on at least six people. Detectives searching the home found bloody scalpels, syringes, and prosthetic testicles in a room the men referred to as "the dungeon."
Officers confiscated a video camera apparently used to record the procedures, as well as scores of CDs and computer files. They also seized a Tupperware container from the kitchen freezer holding what appeared to be human testicles.
The suspects acknowledged performing surgeries, but they told investigators that the procedures were completely consensual and that the men who requested the operations traveled long distances for the procedures.
Like I said – I really don’t know what to say. I bet CourtTV has fun with this trial.
Posted by: Greg at
10:19 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 235 words, total size 2 kb.
In Waynesville, a small county seat in the mountains of western North Carolina, people whispered about the three older men who lived together south of town.They were lovers, and there were rumors that the trio had turned a room in their house into a dungeon where they filmed sadomasochistic sex scenes — and then posted them on the Internet.
Someone asked the local sheriff to investigate the men, but his officers determined their activities, although unorthodox, were perfectly legal.
Last month, however, the men were arrested on charges that shocked the community.Authorities say they performed castrations and other types of genital surgeries on at least six people. Detectives searching the home found bloody scalpels, syringes, and prosthetic testicles in a room the men referred to as "the dungeon."
Officers confiscated a video camera apparently used to record the procedures, as well as scores of CDs and computer files. They also seized a Tupperware container from the kitchen freezer holding what appeared to be human testicles.
The suspects acknowledged performing surgeries, but they told investigators that the procedures were completely consensual and that the men who requested the operations traveled long distances for the procedures.
Like I said – I really don’t know what to say. I bet CourtTV has fun with this trial.
Posted by: Greg at
10:19 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 236 words, total size 2 kb.
House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) issued a joint statement on Tuesday making it clear that it was Democrats who insisted on making unlawful presence in the United States a felony rather than a misdemeanor."In December, the House of Representatives passed a strong border security bill aimed at securing our borders and preventing illegal immigration," the statement said.
"However, on December 16, 2005, there were 191 House Democrats who voted to oppose House Republican efforts to reduce the crime of unlawful presence in the United States from a felony to a misdemeanor. Instead, they voted to make felons out of all of those who remain in our country illegally. (Some conservative Republicans also favored making unlawful presence a felony.)
"While we are disappointed with the House Democrat's lack of compassion and the continued efforts by Senator Reid to block action on immigration legislation so that Congress can proceed to conference, it remains our intent to produce a strong border security bill that will not make unlawful presence in the United States a felony."
But which party is now portrayed as the friend of the illegal immigrant? The one that overwhelmingly opposed making unlawful presence in the US a misdemeanor.
Who says the MSM isnÂ’t biased? Who says that immigrant groups are not in the pocket of the Democrat party? Who says that the Democrats arenÂ’t hypocrites?
No one I know, thatÂ’s for sure.
Posted by: Greg at
10:16 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 273 words, total size 2 kb.
A manager at a Detroit meatpacking plant said Monday that 15 immigrant women were fired last month after attending a protest for immigrant rights. He said they had been told that they would be terminated if they missed work on the day of the protest.But the workers and an activist working on their behalf said the women were given no such assurances. If the workers knew they would have been fired for attending the March 27 rally in Detroit, they never would have skipped the morning shift, said Elena Herrada, a Detroit activist who is trying to help the women get their jobs back.
Herrada and about 20 union officials went Monday to Wolverine Packing Co. offices on Rivard to inquire about what happened. They were given a letter signed by general manager Jay Bonahoom, explaining why the workers were terminated.
* * *
Bonahoom said that as far as Wolverine knows, the workers were documented, but an employment agency does the actual hiring. He said the workers had been told, "written and verbally," on the Friday before the protests that their attendance was mandatory on the day of the protest.
They were fired "for standing up for their rights," Herrada said.
The fired workers were natives of Mexico and many had worked at the plant for several years. Most have children and are worried about supporting their families, Herrada said.
They should have thought of that when they skipped work. But then again, it is questionable whether any of them had the right to be in this country at all, much less working here. Take this woman who was fired as an example.
"It was not fair,'" said Mercedes, a 31-year-old Detroit woman who attended the rally and was fired. "We went to fight for our rights." Mercedes is undocumented and asked that her last name not be used.
Want to bet that her friends fall in the same category?
Posted by: Greg at
10:15 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 349 words, total size 2 kb.
A Glen Carbon man didn't have money to bail his dog out of the county pound, so he busted him out instead, police said.Things got messy, though. Police said they suspect he first mistook the Humane Society for the pound and broke in there, then released three other canines with his dog to cover his tracks.
Madison County prosecutors filed burglary charges Tuesday against Thomas P. Carroll, 20, who is accused of breaking into the county's Animal Control Department building in rural Edwardsville to get back his dog, a Weimaraner named Titus.
Sheriff's deputies were called Monday to the Animal Control building in rural Edwardsville and the neighboring Metro East Humane Society building. Both buildings had been burglarized. Nothing was missing from the Humane Society building, but four dogs were missing from the Animal Control building.
Carroll was identified as the owner of one of the missing dogs. He had been notified a few days earlier that the Animal Control Department had his dog, but he said he wasn't able to pay a $125 fine required to get Titus back.
Detectives think Carroll broke into the Humane Society building first, thinking his dog was there. They also suspect he released the three other dogs at the Animal Control building as a diversion. The three other dogs were found nearby.
Carroll remained Tuesday in the county jail with bail set at $50,000 by Circuit Judge Charles Romani Jr.
Titus, located at the home of CarrollÂ’s parents in another county, is awaiting extradition.
Posted by: Greg at
10:13 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.
That’s why this story caught my attention. It never crossed my mind that my decisions – made with no formal training in the mental health field – could have serious repercussions on the civil liberties of those who I believed needed mental health assistance.
As a Missouri corrections officer for more than 10 years, David Nelson is authorized to carry a gun on the job. But a year ago, he was denied a state permit to buy one.The contradiction became a court dispute that reached all the way to the seven judges of the Missouri Supreme Court, who ruled unanimously Tuesday in Nelson's favor.
The issue dates to Sept. 11, 2003, when a judge in Callaway County ordered that Nelson be detained, evaluated and treated at a mental institution for 96 hours, against his will, because a Fulton police officer alleged that Nelson had talked about suicide.
In that period, the Mid-Missouri Mental Health Center determined that Nelson did not suffer from mental illness and needed neither medication nor psychiatric care. He never got a court hearing to protest the police officer's claim.
On April 27, 2005, Nelson applied for a permit to acquire a concealable weapon, which is different from a concealed-carry permit but is bound by similar rules. The Callaway County Sheriff's Department said no. Sheriff Dennis Crane, and later Prosecuting Attorney Robert Sterner, cited a state law that denies permits to felons or people having been committed to mental institutions.
Nelson sued, losing before Associate Circuit Judge Joe Holt, who had issued the detention order, and then before Circuit Judge Ellen Roper.
Nelson's attorney, Geoffrey Preckshot, took the case to the Supreme Court, arguing that the ruling was unfair to his client and others in a similar situation. "Each of these persons is caught in an almost classic 'Catch 22'; never again to be trusted by society to be allowed to acquire a concealable firearm, but not crazy enough to justify a (commitment) proceeding," he said.
Writing for the unanimous court, Judge Richard B. Teitelman said Nelson had been put under "detention," which he said is different from "committed."
I think this is a good ruling. The mere fact that someone has accessed mental health services is not a basis for denying that person a fundamental right guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. A higher standard must be met – and if a person cannot rebut the presumption of unfitness to exercise their rights because mental health professionals have determined that the initial assessment of non-mental health professionals was incorrect, then the very presumption is both absurd and unjust.
Posted by: Greg at
10:11 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 580 words, total size 4 kb.
April 11, 2006
The federal prosecutor overseeing the indictment of Vice President Cheney's former chief of staff, I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, yesterday corrected an assertion in an earlier court filing that Libby had misrepresented the significance placed by the CIA on allegations that Iraq attempted to buy uranium from Niger.Last week, Special Counsel Patrick J. Fitzgerald wrote that, in conversation with former New York Times reporter Judith Miller, Libby described the uranium story as a "key judgment" of the CIA's 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, a term of art indicating there was consensus within the intelligence community on that issue. In fact, the alleged effort to buy uranium was not among the estimate's key judgments and was listed further back in the 96-page, classified document.
In a letter to U.S. District Judge Reggie B. Walton, Fitzgerald wrote yesterday that he wanted to "correct" the sentence that dealt with the issue in a filing he submitted last Wednesday. That sentence said Libby "was to tell Miller, among other things, that a key judgment of the NIE held that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure' uranium."
Instead, the sentence should have conveyed that Libby was to tell Miller some of the key judgments of the NIE "and that the NIE stated that Iraq was 'vigorously trying to procure' uranium."
Simply one more bit of evidence that Fitzgerals os out of control -- making false claims in filings to inflate the importance and significance of his work. He has exceeded his mandates as a special prosecutor, and needs to be closed down, and his charges against Scooter Libby dismissed.
By the way -- anyone else struck by the fact that the "correction" by Fitzgerald is buried by the same media sources that highlighted the original claims?
Posted by: Greg at
10:48 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 316 words, total size 2 kb.
The discovery and publication of an ancient text, authored by members of a heretical sext and rejected by Christianity some 17 or 18 centuries ago, would lead to calls by those outside of Christianity to reinterpret Christian teaching.
Thus the publication of the so-called Gospel of Judas, while interesting, presents a challenge and a threat to Christianity.
Over the past two millenniums, the figure of Judas in art and religious literature increasingly became a thinly disguised caricature for the Jewish people and a tool for generating anti-Semitism, particularly in Europe, where Passion plays re-enacting the crucifixion often provoked murderous riots called pogroms directed at Jewish neighborhoods. The hatred culminated in the Nazi-directed Holocaust during World War II.It's fitting that National Geographic chose to broadcast a documentary at the start of this Holy Week detailing the discovery of an 1,700-year-old Christian text depicting Judas in an entirely different light. Found bound in leather in an Egyptian cave more than 30 years ago, the painstakingly restored papyrus sheets written in Coptic portray Judas as the disciple entrusted by Christ to carry out the steps necessary for his sacrifice and resurrection, a notion echoed in several passages of the four Gospels of the Bible.
The documentary bluntly confronts the shameful history of Christian anti-Semitism and details how the image of Judas has been employed to stir up hatred and intolerance over the centuries. By contrast, instead of a plot with a despised villain, the Gospel of Judas focuses entirely on Christ's love and willing sacrifice.
Houston Rabbi Amy Weiss describes the document as "an opportunity that has presented itself, and the question is, what will be done with it next?" If major Christian evangelical ministers were to confront the issue of the anti-Semitic characterization of Judas in public sermons, she believes it would have a very positive effect.
So here we have it -- the MSM and Jewish leaders demanding that Chrisstians reinterpret the teachings of Christianity in the light of an ancient heresy to create a more PC version of their faith.
And in the process ignoring decades of theological development on the vry issu that they want reconsidered -- the role of the Jews in the arrest, trial and execution of Jesus of Nazareth.
Because you see, the twentieth century saw a major reevaluation of that very issue by Christians of all stripes. It saw the retranslation of Scripture in a manner that made it clear that it was certain religious and political factions, not the Jewish people as a whole, who played a culpable role in the judicial murder of the Lamb of God. Anti-Semitism was formally repudiated by the Second Vatican Council over four decades ago. Today, it is evangelical Christians who are the leading supporters of Israel and friends of the Jews among Christians. Indeed, it is the liberals in the mainline denominations who flirt with anti-Semitism -- but not based upon the Gspel, but upon their politically correct support for Palestinian terrorists and consequent attacks on Israel.
So the work that some claim needs to be done is a fait accompli -- without resort to the heretical writings of a Gnostic sect.
Posted by: Greg at
10:33 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 545 words, total size 4 kb.
But then again, this (allegedly) obscene video mocks and insults Bill Clinton. No wonder they are taking action.
School officials were talking with some students Monday at West Limestone High School after receiving additional complaints from parents about offensive material shown to students by teacher Steve White.“We’re investigating that now,” said Superintendent Dr. Barry Carroll.
White, who is a Democratic candidate for the District 4 seat on the state House of Representatives, was previously accused of showing an offensive Internet video against the Bush administration to his eighth grade science class at West Limestone High School.
“We’ve had some calls from parents about other allegations and we are talking to students,” Carroll said. “We hope by (Tuesday) we will be able to determine something and move in whatever direction we need to.”
Carroll did not describe the new complaints but one parent said an obscene video showing an animated Bill Clinton was shown to students.
Sorry, but this double standard is pretty offensive. The first offense was so egregious that White should have been fired, or at least suspended, due to his unprofessional conduct, not merely reprimanded. That there is a pattern makes termination of the now-suspended teacher mandatory.
And interestingly enough, the superintendent that defended the initial reprimand of White had a much harsher standard when it came to recommending the termination of a bus driver a few months ago. I didn't know the details when I first wrote on this issue, but it seems that the language used in that case was significantly less offensive than that which White brought into the classroom and for which he was merely reprimanded.
However, in a public school board meeting in December, Carroll recommended the board fire a bus driver who allegedly said the phrase “p—-ed off” and the d-word to students on the bus. The board voted not to terminate the driver.
Compare that to over twenty uses of the word "asshole" in the video, along with one use of "shit" and the flipping of a profane gesture. Seems to me that Dr. Carroll has some serious explaining to do about his sense of proportionality.
Hopefully this incident will be sufficient to result in Steve White's permanent removal from the classroom -- and that certain other folks in both campus and district administration are ushered out the door in Limestone County.
MORE AT: Michelle Malkin, SpunkyHomeSchool, Right Wing Nation, AListReview, J Rob's House of Opinion, Church and State, HoodaThunk?, Freedom for Some, Freedom Folks, Once More Into The Breach, Daily Musings, Moonbattery, Brutally Honest, Aldaynet, Right Voices, Independent Conservative, Expose the Left, Michelle Malkin (again), Media Crunch, Church and State (again), Skilletfan, Mike's America, Strata-Sphere
Posted by: Greg at
12:42 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 523 words, total size 6 kb.
Now the ACLU is up in arms over the article, demanding that von SpakoskyÂ’s views not even be considered as a new Georgia law, which was passed to meet concerns expressed by liberal groups and a federal court, is evaluated by the Justice Department.
ACLU lawyer [Neil] Bradley believes von Spakovsky's involvement in clearing the previous law could taint consideration of the current law. Bradley has asked Wan J. Kim, assistant attorney general for the Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division, to take steps to ensure von Spakovsky's views are not considered as part of the review of Georgia's new law.
In other words, the views of someone with expertise in election laws and who has reviewed the evidence rather than repeated the scare-stories should be excluded from consideration when laws are evaluated for discriminatory effect. Rather than attack the argument made by von Spakovsky, the ACLU lawyer attacks the man who holds them.
But more shocking is this inane quote from the ACLUÂ’s Bradley.
Neil Bradley, a lawyer for the ACLU Voting Rights Project, said the anonymous nature of von Spakovsky's writing is particularly alarming."Here's a man who had strong enough views that he published it, but then wanted to hide the fact he had the views," Bradley said. "Either he should have the views and stand up straight and admit them or he shouldn't be involved in the process."
Let's ignore the fact that such a statement is contrary to the official position of the ACLU on anonymous political speech -- a position taken repeatedly over the years.
It also ignores the history of political speech in America, in which pseudonymous and allonymous writings date back to before the American Revolution. That tradition includes the Federalist Papers, written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay to justify the aadoption of the US Constitution. Would Bradley like to argue that these men should not have been involved in the ratification process?
Oh, and by the way -- like von Spakovsky's article, the Federalist Papers were originally published under the name "Publius".
Posted by: Greg at
12:10 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 429 words, total size 3 kb.
You see, the cops and prosecutors have determined that the actions of the animals in question were based upon greed, not race.
Although eyewitnesses allegedly heard shouts of "Get whitey!" from one of the suspects, the commanding officer of the Hate Crimes Task Force, deputy inspector Michael Osgood, said the incident was not racially motivated.Mr. Osgood described the teenagers as an "organized robbery team" who first targeted a Hispanic man, but were intimidated by a passing police car. Then Hehman came along.
The crime, Mr. Osgood said, was motivated by "economic reasons." For a hate crime to occur, Mr. Osgood said, "the main reason for the crime must be the identity of the victim. You can see how their purpose of meeting him, engaging him, was to rob him," Mr. Osgood said.
The racially charged remark of "Get the white boy!" was a "gratuitous slur," Mr. Osgood said.
A “gratuitous slur”?
Is there such a thing as a “gratuitous slur” when some white punk yells “get the nigger” or some other hate-filled phrase? Or does the “gratuitous slur” rule apply only to minority criminals in cases where the authorities are too cowardly to take on the racism that exists in minority communities?
Fortunately, civil rights leaders and blacks in law enforcement are taking a stand against this frightening failure to deal with racism.
The ruling drew a swift and sharp reaction from civil rights activists and black police officers. "At least in part it's a hate crime," the former director of the New York Civil Liberties union, Norman Siegel, said. "All racial violence is equally deplorable.' Charging the teens with a bias crime, he said, would be an "acknowledgement of racial tension."One of the founders of 100 Blacks in Law Enforcement Who Care, a fraternal organization for African American police officers, Eric Adams, agreed. "When you look at the logic they are using to come to that conclusion, it's really troubling."
If the Police Department is saying identifying the race of the victim is merely a description, Mr. Adams said, then "we have to rewrite the current law for bias crimes. The mere fact his race was interjected, the courts have to decide why that was. Our position is it should be out of the hands of the Police Department and in the hands of the courts."All people should be protected under hate crimes legislation," Mr. Adams said. "A white guy can be as much a victim as a black guy." Mr. Adams is a retired police captain.
Both Mr. Siegel and Mr. Adams said they would meet with the Manhattan district attorney, Robert Morgenthau, to encourage him to include hate-crime charges against the suspects.
I salute those in the black community who acknowledge that racism is racism is racism.
MORE AT Michelle Malkin
Posted by: Greg at
11:23 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 492 words, total size 3 kb.
April 10, 2006
Fox, according to Casey Wian on CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight (March 31), "is still refusing to do anything to stop the millions of illegal aliens ... saying he won't restrict the freedom of movement of Mexican citizens."The Associated Press reports, "Mexico has long cited a freedom-of-movement clause in its Constitution as prohibiting any attempt to stop would-be Mexican migrants from massing at border towns. Former Mexican Interior Secretary Santiago Creel actually said his country would never help to secure the southern border. 'We are not going to do that,' Creel told Jerry Kammer of the Copley News Service. Creel claimed Mexico's Constitution provides for 'complete freedom of movement' for Mexicans inside Mexico. 'We can't put up a checkpoint or a customs station inside our territory,' Creel said."
Yet these statements seem contrary to the Constitution and law when the whole picture is viewed. Starting with the fact that there is more to the applicable constitutional article than just its first sentence.
Article 11 states: "Everyone has the right to enter and leave the Republic, to travel through its territory and to change their residence without need of a letter of security, passport, safe-conduct or other similar requisites. The exercise of this right will be subordinate to the powers of the judiciary in cases of criminal or civil liability, and to those of administrative authority with regard to limitations that laws on emigration, immigration and general health of the Republic, or on pernicious foreign residents in the country, may impose."
And the key of course is in the second sentence, namely "will be subordinate to" — with the General Population Law being the primary directive.
Mexico, you see, can act to secure its border with the US -- but chooses not to do so.
More to the point, laws already exist to do exactly that. Besides -- stopping the border-jumpoing would lead to social and economic pressures to reform the corrupt Mexican political system.
But Mexico instead finds it profitible to let its exces workers head to El Norte and send back billions -- and so ignores its own laws while encouraging the violation of ours.
Mr. Fox -- if you have no respect for US law, at least show some respect for the laws of Mexico.
Posted by: Greg at
10:27 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 415 words, total size 3 kb.
And now the Democrats are going after one of the independents.
A University of Houston student on Monday accused supporters of independent gubernatorial hopeful Carole Keeton Strayhorn of misleading his classmates about the candidate's past stance on tuition deregulation.Isaiah Warner, president of the school's Young Democrats chapter, said three people who were gathering signatures on campus last week to get Strayhorn on the November ballot told him she had never supported legislation that gave university leaders the authority to set a portion of tuition rates.
As comptroller, Strayhorn issued a report in 2003 urging state leaders to transfer that power from the Legislature to the universities.
"Given her clear record as one of the original supporters of tuition deregulation, this is a deliberate attempt to fabricate her record and mislead Texas college students," Warner said in a prepared statement.
Strayhorn spokesman Mark Sanders said no campaign employee has ever misrepresented her position. But an unknown number of volunteers are also collecting signatures, with or without the campaign's knowledge, and one of them may have misspoke, he said.
"The point is the campaign has been at all times upfront and truthful about the comptroller's positions on a myriad of issues," he said.
Tempest in a teapot.
Posted by: Greg at
10:19 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 228 words, total size 2 kb.
74 queries taking 0.5547 seconds, 433 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
