After being faced with a five-month witch-hunt investigation, the College Republicans at San Francisco State University are suing to have the school's speech code struck down and the First Amendment upheld in its place.

San Francisco State University was sued for allegedly violating students' right to free speech when it investigated an incident during which students stomped on flags bearing the name of Allah.

The Alliance Defense Fund and the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) filed the federal lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs — the College Republicans club and two of its members.

The case charges the university with having violated the plaintiffs' First Amendment rights by dragging them through a five-month investigation and campus tribunal after they stepped on Hamas and Hezbollah flags during an anti-terrorism rally. The flags bear the Muslim name for God, Allah.

"The Supreme Court ruled long ago that the First Amendment protects the right to burn even an American flag in political protest," FIRE President Greg Lukianoff said in a statement. "There are no special protections for Hamas and Hezbollah flags. SFSU knew this, and there is no excuse for putting these students through a five-month ordeal."

remember -- this is a school that also regularly allows anti-Semitic rallies in support of the Terrorstinian cause, but which has punished Jewish students who have been assaulted while counter-protesting. And lest the religious favoritism of the school's policies and practices be lost, please remember that the school's spokesperson made it clear that the CRs who are suing now were investigated and prosecuted under the school's speech code for "the desecration of Allah" -- a sign that there is a grievous double-standard regarding religious speech and an establishment of the religion of Islam as uniquely protected by this state university.

Posted by: Greg at 02:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.

Now let me begin with saying that I fully believe this shooting was justified -- and that I wish Borris Miles had managed to ventilate both perps, not just one. However, the hypocrisy here is rather striking.

Borris Miles told police he was fixing a leak on the second floor of the Houston house he's building Sunday night when he heard a noise downstairs and saw two men trying to steal the copper. After Miles confronted the pair, one of the men threw a pocketknife at him, Houston Police spokesman Victor Senties.

Miles, a former law enforcement officer, shot the man in the left leg, police said. The wounded suspect was being treated at a Houston hospital. Police were trying to identify the other suspect.

Charges of aggravated robbery are pending against the wounded suspect, Senties said.

The hypocrisy, of course, stems from the fact that Miles is a Democrat in the Texas Legislature who voted against allowing Texans to do exactly what he did -- shoot without making every possible effort to retreat from criminals.

Posted by: Greg at 02:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 180 words, total size 1 kb.

Proving once again that the paper's editors consider the US Constitution to be nothing more than toilet paper, today's editorial insists that the religious beliefs of a well-qualified nominee for public office be scrutinized carefully -- and that the nominee be rejected because of the religiously-based moral views he has expressed in the past.

What’s troubling is the view he once expressed — and may still hold — on homosexuality, through his activities as a lay leader in the United Methodist Church. On the church’s judicial council, he supported a minister who refused to allow a gay man to join his congregation and argued that a lesbian minister should be removed because church doctrine deems the practice of homosexuality to be “incompatible with Christian teaching.” His supporters say these rulings should not be read as his personal views because the council can’t change church doctrine. However, some council members opposed his views, and the bishops later rejected one decision.

His strongest statement on homosexuality can be found in a murky, loosely reasoned paper that he wrote for a church committee in 1991. Titled “Pathophysiology of Male Homosexuality,” the paper purported to be a scientific and medical review. It argued that gay sex was abnormal on anatomical and physiological grounds and unhealthy, in that anal sex can lead to rectal injuries and sexually transmitted diseases. Dr. Holsinger did not brand the large number of heterosexual women who engage in anal sex as abnormal, failed to acknowledge the huge burden of disease spread heterosexually and implied that women are more likely than men to avoid injuries with generous lubrication.

The Bush administration says the white paper reflected the scientific understanding of the time, but it reads like a veneer of science cloaking an aversion to homosexuality. The committee should examine whether Dr. Holsinger cherry-picked the literature or represented it objectively. Most important, it must determine whether Dr. Holsinger holds these benighted views today. The Senate should not confirm a surgeon general who considers practicing homosexuals abnormal and diseased.

This does, however, fly in the face of the clear command of Article VI of the US Constitution -- no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.

Interestingly enough, the paper produces no examples of Dr. Holsinger actually discriminating against homosexuals -- indeed, it notes that he has in the past stood up to political pressure to make sure that the health concerns of homosexuals are examined by medical professionals at government-sponsored conferences. Rather, they focus on one scientific paper that gay activists disagree with, and even more closely upon internal matters of church discipline and practice based upon his service in church leadership roles.

There was a time when the New York Times actually believed in the US Constitution as a matter of editorial policy. There was a time that civil rights and civil liberties were viewed as fundamental rights and freedoms not to be violated by the government. Today, however, that formerly great media outlet has clearly rejected the fundamental freedoms protected by that document, and in the name of political correctness demands that Congress do what is prohibited by the blueprint of American liberty. Congress -- indeed, every real American -- must reject the fundamentally unAmerican proposition put forth by the paper today.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, The Random Yak, DeMediacratic Nation, Jeanette's Celebrity Corner, Right Truth, The Bullwinkle Blog, The Amboy Times, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, Right Celebrity, Wake Up America, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Nuke's news and views, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, CommonSenseAmerica, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 632 words, total size 6 kb.

If you have ever slept on a water bed, you know what a wonderful night's sleep they can bring. Indeed, if they were more practical I believe they would have replaced the inner spring mattress years ago. I know that whenever I have slept in one, I have found relief from my back and neck pain.

But what if I told you that you can get many of the same benefits from a pillow? Yeah, you read that right -- a pillow that provides the comfort and support needed to relieve some of that back and neck pain. It is the mediflow pillow. Used for years in hospitals, it is now available to you for home use.

How does it work? Simply put, the Mediflow waterbase pillow has a pouch beneath a standard polyester filling. You then add water to your own comfort level, to provide a more comfortable, supportive sleeping surface beneath your head and neck.

Now you may wonder if this is a gimmick. I assure you it isn't. These pillows have actually been studied and shown to provide real benefits for improving sleep and relieving chronic neck pain. Given my wife's issues with chronic neck and back pain, I'm going to have to put a copy of the study in her hands. I suspect that means we will have be headed out to JC Penney or Target to get her one to help her improve her sleep.

Posted by: Greg at 01:03 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 243 words, total size 2 kb.

After promising the world she was just going to go away, Cindy Sheehan is back seeking another 15 minutes of fame

Now she is threatening to run for Congress against Nancy Pelosi if she doesn't get the president impeached.

Cindy Sheehan, the soldier's mother who galvanized the anti-war movement, said Sunday that she plans to seek House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's congressional seat unless she introduces articles of impeachment against President Bush in the next two weeks.

Sheehan said she will run against the San Francisco Democrat in 2008 as an independent if Pelosi does not seek by July 23 to impeach Bush. That's when Sheehan and her supporters are to arrive in Washington, D.C., after a 13-day caravan and walking tour starting next week from the group's war protest site near Bush's Crawford ranch.

"Democrats and Americans feel betrayed by the Democratic leadership," Sheehan told The Associated Press. "We hired them to bring an end to the war. I'm not too far from San Francisco, so it wouldn't be too big of a move for me. I would give her a run for her money."

I'm particularly struck that Sheehan doesn't notice that Bush hasn't committed an impeachable offense. But then again, since when has the Constitution mattered to these people.

I'm also pleasantly surprised at how Sheehan breaks matters down -- referring to "Democrats and Americans". At least she is honest enough to place herself and the rest of the Democrats in the anti-American category where they belong.

Posted by: Greg at 06:55 AM | Comments (21) | Add Comment
Post contains 255 words, total size 2 kb.

Expect to see more of this as the Arizona Senator's campaign implodes.

The downsizing of Senator McCain's presidential campaign is coming at an opportune time for Fred Thompson, the former Tennessee senator who is likely to jump into the race officially any day now and seeking to build a campaign staff in the early primary states.

Struggling with a shortage of cash, Mr. McCain's campaign announced last week that it was laying off dozens of staff members, including about half of his paid team in Iowa and New Hampshire.

While there is no evidence of an outright pillaging of Mr. McCain's departed aides, Republican sources in those states say Mr. Thompson's emerging campaign is the likeliest landing spot. Aside from Mr. Thompson's obvious need for staff — assuming he enters the race — the two are closely aligned ideologically, and Mr. Thompson even endorsed Mr. McCain when he sought the White House in 2000.

This really shouldn't be much of a surprise to anyone. Of the major candidates, Mitt Romney has the best organization in place, and has done a superb job of staffing his campaign. he just doesn't need many additional people at this time.

The differences between Rudy Giuliani and John McCain are stark enough that most McCain staffers wouldn't fit in at this early stage of the race.

And the other candidates in the race are operating with small staffs until and unless they can get some traction in this race.

But Fred Thompson is starting a brand new organization, and appeals to much of the same base that John McCain does It doesn't come as any surprise to me, therefore, that the logical home for some of these operatives is the Thompson campaign. Some may end up elsewhere, but expect most of the early departures from McCain to end up with the former Tennessee senator.

Posted by: Greg at 06:39 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.

As the welts start to grow on both feet and legs, I just want to share that bit of information with you. Stepped in a hidden mound in the back yard while mowing this morning.

Indeed, I've long since come to the conclusion that the fire ant is proof that Satan may have had a hand in creating the world. After all, I find it difficult to believe that a loving and just God would have created fire ants.

Posted by: Greg at 06:32 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 87 words, total size 1 kb.

Sponsored Post

Like I've said in the past, seeking out credit and loans are a part of our society. There are simply some purchases that your average person can't make, like a car or a house. In those situations, are usually the only option out there, with the lender having a lien on your house or car. That seems to be a fair trade -- after all, they are, in a sense, the real owner of at least some portion of the property until you have fulfilled your end of the bargain, right?

Secured loans, though, are not the only sort of personal loans you might need. Many loans are unsecured -- especially as we look at credit card debt, which has run rampant in modern society as folks are extended credit well beyond their means to ever pay back. These folks often then find themselves taking out a debt consolidation loan in the hopes of lowering payments and interest rates, as well as extending the time one has to pay off the debt. This can be a great move -- provided one has the self-discipline to not run up additional debt while clearing up the old mess.

Other loans are personal secured loans, like car loans and mortgages. The item for which the loan is taken out is the security for the value of the loan, and can be taken in the event that the payments are not made.

My advice? Borrow only when you have to, and only to the degree that you can afford to pay back. Otherwise you face bankruptcy -- with all the credit and personal implications that implies.

Posted by: Greg at 07:29 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are Guess Where Your President Was Wednesday Morning... Insh'allah by Joshuapundit, and Bless the Beasts and Children by Michael Yon. 

Here are the full tallies of all votes cast:

Posted by: Greg at 06:33 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 193 words, total size 4 kb.

Sponsored Post

Do you want to spice up your home decorating with original artwork, not the same old prints from the big box store or the starving artist knock-offs that everybody has seen a dozen times? Do you want to turn your photos into real works of art If you do, PhotoFiddle.com is the site for you to visit. You can arrange to have your photo printed on canvas or print-quality paper -- and you can even have it done in over 50 different artistic styles. Personally, I'm fond of this Warhol effect.

Posted by: Greg at 06:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 94 words, total size 1 kb.

Animal rights terrorists.

A gasoline-filled device in a car bomb fails to go off. Authorities investigating another bombing incident find that after a first bomb exploded, a second bomb was timed to go off when first responders arrived. A recent event in the United Kingdom? Yes, but also in California.

Last week, the Los Angeles Times reported that a bomb was discovered outside the Westside home of Dr. Arthur Rosenbaum, the chief of pediatric ophthalmology at UCLA's Jules Stein Eye Institute. The car bomb failed to explode, despite apparent attempts to detonate it.

I'm curious -- why didn't the media in this country pick up the story and run with it, alerting the American public to the threat in this country and not just the jihadis attacking the UK?

And why aren't more of us familiar with this terrorist ring leader, who walks among us as a free man.

So far, animal rights activists have not killed anyone in the United States, but that does not mean Americans should not fear these extremists. In October 2005, Dr. Jerry Vlasak, a Southern California trauma surgeon who is a leader of the North American Animal Liberation Front, testified before the U.S. Senate and defended killing researchers in order to stop research using animals.

"I don't think you'd have to kill -- assassinate -- too many," Vlasak opined. "I think for 5 lives, 10 lives, 15 human lives, we could save a million, 2 million or 10 million nonhuman lives.''

And the threats of violence and intimidation work. Last year, UCLA researcher Dario Ringach sent an e-mail to Vlasak in which he proclaimed, "You win" -- he would stop research with animals. Vlasak sent out a triumphant press release.

Vlasak told the Daily Bruin that activists had tried to stop Rosenbaum's research by appealing to UCLA administrators but had failed. "All reasonable attempts have failed, so we're going to take it to the next level," Vlasak told the student paper.

Where is the federal action against Vlasak and his cohorts? Where is the media coverage? And when will the American people stand up and insist that a stop be put to this threat to American lives -- and scientific research that has the potential to save human lives.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Faultline USA, Stageleft, Big Dog's Weblog, Right Truth, Walls of the City, The Pet Haven Blog, The Pink Flamingo, The Bullwinkle Blog, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 05:49 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 430 words, total size 4 kb.

Looks like the religion of global warming is losing one of its key articles of faith -- the notion of a "consensus" on the issue among scientists.

The last issue of SCIENCE is waffling like mad on the global warming fad, warning its readers that it may not be so settled a question. Under the headline "Another Global Warming Icon Comes Under Attack," SCIENCE writer Richard Kerr writes

"...a group of mainstream atmospheric scientists is disputing a rising icon of global warming, and researchers are giving some ground." ...

"Robert Charlson of the University of Washington, Seattle, (is) one of three authors of a commentary published online last week in Nature Reports: Climate Change. ... he and his co-authors argue that the simulation by 14 different climate models of the warming in the 20th century is not the reassuring success IPCC claims it to be."

(IPCC is the supposed international scientific consensus document on global warming - JL).

"... In the run-up to the IPCC climate science report released last February ... 14 groups ran their models under 20th-century conditions of rising greenhouse gases. ... But the group of three atmospheric scientists ... says the close match between models and the actual warming is deceptive. The match "conveys a lot more confidence [in the models] than can be supported in actuality," says Schwartz. [....]

"Greenhouse gas changes are well known, they note, but not so the counteracting cooling of pollutant hazes, called aerosols. Aerosols cool the planet by reflecting away sunlight and increasing the reflectivity of clouds. Somehow, the three researchers say, modelers failed to draw on all the uncertainty inherent in aerosols so that the 20th-century simulations look more certain than they should." [Italics added]

What? "Somehow" they missed the biggest unknown factor in climate prediction?

Highly qualified climate scientists have long warned that warming estimates have at least one giant question mark: Water vapor and other tiny particles in the atmosphere. By failing to include reliable estimates of such "hazes" (not necessarily pollutants, as the article says), global warming models are likely to err wildly on the side of warming. It's the unseen elephant in the living room.

Not only that, but the scientific data used to support global warming does not meet the usual standard of proof for scientific publications -- having a 90% confidence rate rather than the standard 95% confidence rate expected of rigorous scientific studies. In other words, not only is the science sloppy, but so is the standard of proof the acolytes of global warming are willing to accept in the name of consensus.

So much for consensus, dudes.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Faultline USA, Stageleft, Big Dog's Weblog, Right Truth, Walls of the City, The Pet Haven Blog, The Pink Flamingo, The Bullwinkle Blog, Conservative Cat, Adeline and Hazel, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 05:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 485 words, total size 4 kb.

Probably nothing to this story except a random burglary -- except for the fact that I remember being a kid in Washington DC 35 years ago and seeing a little blurb in the newspaper about a break-in at the DNC.

he Davenport campaign headquarters for Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was burglarized Friday night.

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, said that two laptop computers and some campaign literature were taken. A campaign worker discovered the burglary this morning, and a report was filed with Davenport police.

"It doesn't appear that it was anything sensitive or irreplaceable," Vietor said.

Now which candidate has a history of of dirty tricks against political opponents?

Posted by: Greg at 05:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 117 words, total size 1 kb.

The New York Times offers five possibilities.

So here we are: at the end of the “Harry Potter” decade. The books have been printed and are under lock and key. (Presumably.) J. K. Rowling has made her choices. Harry is either going to live or die. Severus Snape is either evil or good — or maybe a little bit of both. Ginny will stick with Harry, and Ron will hook up with Hermione. Or not. Eager readers still have to wait a fortnight or so for answers to these questions.

Which is why the Op-Ed page asked four writers and one artist to fill the void and draft “Harry Potter” endings of their own.

In some he lives. In some he dies. One is unclear. And one is downright cynical.

And then there is this piece of graphic madness.

I envisioned scenes from an apocalyptic battle. Strung together in a nonlinear visual narrative, they are meant to set a certain mood. I intended to offer points of departure for the imagination rather than provide a concrete answer to the question of how it will all end.

— ANDREA DEZSÖ, an artist and a professor at Parsons the New School for Design

Uh. . . in other words, he doesn't have the faintest idea. Call it post-modern story-telling.

Posted by: Greg at 01:32 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 2 kb.

This could be interesting.

President Chen Shui-bian said Taiwan will press ahead with a controversial referendum on whether the self-ruled island should apply for U.N. membership under the name Taiwan, dismissing U.S. objections as appeasement of China.

Chen's defiant stand, outlined in frank language during an interview Friday, raised the prospect of a rocky period in Taiwan's relations with the Bush administration and a rise in tension across the volatile 100-mile strait separating Taiwan from mainland China.

China and the United States have complained that the referendum, which would have little practical effect, in fact is designed to promote a change in the island's official name, from Republic of China to Taiwan. This, both governments charged, could be read as a unilateral change in the island's status, something China's leaders have said they will not tolerate.

The island has been called the Republic of China since Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist forces fled here after being defeated by the Communists of Mao Zedong in 1949. China has said the island must one day reunite with the mainland and has vowed to use force if necessary to prevent a decisive move toward independence -- such as changing the official name to Taiwan.

But Chen, an ardent independence advocate who is nearing the end of his second four-year term, said the idea of such a referendum has been endorsed by the main opposition group, the Nationalist Party, as well as his own People's Progressive Party and was supported by 71 percent of Taiwanese citizens questioned in a national poll. Canceling the plans would amount to frustrating the democratic rights of Taiwan's 23 million people to express their views and guide government policies, he said.

"The path we have embarked on is the right one, and we shall continue to follow it," he declared.

Frankly, the US should be supporting this referendum, not opposing it. It recognizes a fundamental reality for over a half century -- the separation of Taiwan from China and its existence of an independent, free nation and not a part of the Red Chinese hegemony. Indeed, our failure to support and recognize Taiwanese independence is a betrayal of our own heritage as a nation that broke free of oppressors and grasped independence with both hands.

The free nations of the world need to make it clear to the Red Chinese that any attempt to prevent Taiwanese independence will be met with a strong response -- and that an attack on Taiwan will be treated as an attack on the homeland of every freedom-living nation.

Posted by: Greg at 01:21 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 431 words, total size 3 kb.

They came in with grand promises for the "first hundred hours" -- and then defined that term to stretch over weeks by claiming that meant only hours the full Congress was in session, not actual clock hours.

Then they failed to accomplish those goals.

Now they can't bring themselves to do their most basic job.

President Bush accused Democratic lawmakers on Saturday of being unable to live up to their duties, citing Congress' inability to pass legislation to fund the federal government.

"Democrats are failing in their responsibility to make tough decisions and spend the people's money wisely," Bush said in his weekly radio address. "This moment is a test."

The White House has said the failure of a broad immigration overhaul was proof that Democratic-controlled Capitol Hill cannot take on major issues. "We saw this with immigration, and we're seeing it with some other issues where Congress is having an inability to take on major challenges," said spokesman Tony Fratto.

The Democrats: Failed Leadership Inaction.

Posted by: Greg at 01:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 174 words, total size 1 kb.

And they make no bones about it.

It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.

And for all the editorial attempts to whitewash it, the "negotiated settlement" to the war in Iraq is nothing more than a call to negotiate the terms under which the United States will surrender. And the editorial also fails to explain how withdrawal and retrenchment from Iraq proper will keep al-Qaeda from following the troops to wherever they go -- be that Kurdistan, Kuwait, or Kansas.

The only up-sides I can see to this outcome will be burqas for Maureen Dowd and Rosie O'Donnell.

Posted by: Greg at 01:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 126 words, total size 1 kb.

Sponsored Post

Have you been looking for love in all the wrong places? You know, those same old dating sites full of skinny blonde girls who look like they would break in half if you gave them one good squeeze. If that's the case, then you might want to consider this bbw dating site where you will find a plethora of Rubenesque beauties and other real women who (like most women) don't fit into the Paris Hilton/Nicole Ritchie mold. So if you are looking for a href="http://www.bbwromance.com">bbw personals to try to find the perfect woman for you, then BBWRomance is the place for you. Oh, and ladies -- there are men there looking for you, too.

Posted by: Greg at 06:49 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 118 words, total size 1 kb.

Sounds bad -- but I think I understand the reasoning.

A secret military operation in early 2005 to capture senior members of Al Qaeda in PakistanÂ’s tribal areas was aborted at the last minute after top Bush administration officials decided it was too risky and could jeopardize relations with Pakistan, according to intelligence and military officials.

The target was a meeting of Qaeda leaders that intelligence officials thought included Ayman al-Zawahri, Osama bin LadenÂ’s top deputy and the man believed to run the terrorist groupÂ’s operations.

But the mission was called off after Donald H. Rumsfeld, then the defense secretary, rejected an 11th-hour appeal by Porter J. Goss, then the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, officials said. Members of a Navy Seals unit in parachute gear had already boarded C-130 cargo planes in Afghanistan when the mission was canceled, said a former senior intelligence official involved in the planning.

Mr. Rumsfeld decided that the operation, which had ballooned from a small number of military personnel and C.I.A. operatives to several hundred, was cumbersome and put too many American lives at risk, the current and former officials said. He was also concerned that it could cause a rift with Pakistan, an often reluctant ally that has barred the American military from operating in its tribal areas, the officials said.

As one looks at that explanation, it become very clear why they didn't complete the operation -- it was too complex to complete successfully AND would have constituted an act of war against Pakistan, a putative ally in the War on Terror. What's more, the attack would have dangerously undermined the Musharraf government -- and possibly led to the establishment of an Islamist government that would have been less cooperative with the US and more cooperative with the terrorists.

Of course, this is one of those "damned if you do, damned if you don't" situations.

Having aborted the mission on sound grounds, the Bush Administration's opponents can question the seriousness and competence of the administration. Had the operation moved forward, the administration would be blamed for the negative consequences with regard to Pakistan -- not to mention the criticisms that would have been leveled had the mission failed.

Posted by: Greg at 12:46 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 379 words, total size 2 kb.

When making distinctions will get you sued, you have to treat a butterknife and a broadsword the same.

Or adolescent words of love the same as gang graffiti.

Shelby Sendelbach, a sixth-grader in the Katy Independent School District, was read her rights, ticketed and punished with a mandatory four-month assignment to an alternative school because she wrote "I love Alex" on a gymnasium wall with a baby blue Sharpie.

The graffiti offense is a Level 4 infraction in the district's discipline plan, along with making terroristic threats, possessing dangerous drugs, and assaulting with bodily injury. Only a Level 5 — for murder, possessing firearms, committing aggravated or sexual assault, arson or other felonies — is more severe.

Shelby's parents, Lisa and Stu Sendelbach, say they do not condone what their daughter did. Nevertheless, they are fighting to get her punishment reduced because they believe it is too harsh.

The Sendelbachs said they expected a lesser punishment such as an in-school suspension and community service. Shelby is assigned to alternative school from Aug. 27 through Dec. 21. A district-level appeal hearing is scheduled later this month.

"We are shocked that the school district rules as they are written make no distinction between what Shelby is accused of and what a gang member does with a can of black spray paint," Stu Sendelbach said.

The 12-year-old Mayde Creek Junior High student said she regrets the May 21 incident for which school police cited her for criminal mischief and the making of graffiti. The graffiti offense is punishable as a felony because the marking was made in permanent ink.

And the reality is that Katy ISD is know for its strict zero tolerance policies, so don't expect any mercy for this girl. After all, that would give the gang kid who tagged up the entire building or the kid who threatened to blow up the building a chance to claim that they were discriminated against.

Interestingly enough, state law does NOT require this outcome.

But Rep. Rob Eissler, R-The Woodlands, disagreed. Eissler co-authored House Bill 603 in 2005, which gives administrators more latitude to consider disciplinary history, intent, whether a student has a disability that would impair judgment or acted in self-defense in deciding punishment.

"They have all the leeway they want," he said. "They didn't have to hammer this young lady the way they did. That's why I wrote HB 603 — to give school districts authority to back off the black-and-white justice."

I won't take a position on what the appropriate punishment is in this case -- but I think we can all agree that an entire semester in the alternative school for the most severe disciplinary problems, including violent felons, is probably not it.

UPDATE -- 7/11/07: Common sense may prevail.

The Katy Independent School District is reconsidering a decision to send a sixth-grader to alternative school for four months after she confessed to writing "I love Alex" on a school gymnasium wall with a baby blue Sharpie.

Under a firestorm of criticism, the district is researching discipline options for Shelby Sendelbach, a 12-year-old Mayde Creek Junior High School pupil who was punished by the district with a Level 4 infraction after writing the message in permanent ink.

The graffiti offense — on par with making terroristic threats, drug possession and assault — is punishable as a felony under the district's discipline plan. Only a Level 5 is more severe — for murder, possessing firearms, aggravated or sexual assault and arson.

We'll know more next week.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, The Bullwinkle Blog, , third world county, Faultline USA, Woman Honor Thyself, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, stikNstein... has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 02:42 AM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 676 words, total size 6 kb.

Pope Benedict XVI has finally promulgated his new document allowing wider use of the Tridentine Mass.

Pope Benedict XVI removed restrictions on celebrating the old form of the Latin Mass on Saturday in a concession to traditional Catholics, but he stressed that he was in no way rolling back the reforms of the Second Vatican Council.

Benedict issued a document authorizing parish priests to celebrate the Tridentine Mass if a ''stable group of faithful'' request it. Currently, the local bishop must approve such requests -- an obstacle that fans of the rite say has greatly limited its availability.

''What earlier generations held as sacred remains sacred and great for us too, and it cannot be all of a sudden entirely forbidden or even considered harmful,'' Benedict wrote.

Why bring it back?

Benedict said his overall goal was to unify the church. In the past, he wrote, ''at critical moments when divisions were coming about, not enough was done by the church's leaders to maintain or regain reconciliation and unity.''

This constitutes a wise pastoral move -- and one which really does not call into question any of the Vatican II reforms, despite the fears of extreme liberals and hopes of extreme conservatives.

Posted by: Greg at 02:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 212 words, total size 1 kb.

Personally, this doesn't bother me. After all, lawyers and lobbyists sometimes represent clients who they disagree with on an issue.

Former Senator Fred D. Thompson, who has positioned himself as an opponent of abortion rights as he prepares to run for president, was hired as a lobbyist 16 years ago by a group on the other side of the issue, according to documents and people involved with his hiring.

The group, the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, hired Mr. Thompson in 1991, three years before he was elected to the Senate from Tennessee, as part of the groupÂ’s effort to overturn a ban on federally financed family planning clinics giving women information about abortion, according to the groupÂ’s board minutes and former president. The associationÂ’s president at the time, Judith DeSarno, said she was looking for a Republican lobbyist who could help find a compromise at a time when the first President George Bush was opposed to lifting the ban, put in place during the Reagan administration. Mr. Thompson, then a lobbyist at a prominent Washington law firm, fit the bill, she said.

In the group’s board minutes of September 1991, Ms. DeSarno reported hiring Mr. Thompson to “aid us in discussions with the administration.” Ms. DeSarno, who provided the minutes, said in an interview that Mr. Thompson served as the group’s liaison to the White House.

A spokesman for Mr. Thompson said yesterday that Mr. Thompson had “no recollection of doing any work on behalf of this group.”

Key to me is that this appears to be a relatively minor part of Thompson's work, and that the rest of his record is sufficiently pro-life.

And I do want to reemphasize my earlier point -- and illustrate it with an example.

When I was in seminary, one of my professors was a Jesuit whose brother was a lawyer involved in a major criminal case -- he was the lead attorney for Jeffrey Dahmer. Naturally, someone asked this professor (our moral theology prof) how one could morally defend such an individual and try to get them off at trial. his response still resonates with me all these years later -- "You speak truthfully, you protect your client's interests, and you seek an outcome which balances his interests and the interests of justice. But you cannot say that anyone, even someone who has acted as horribly as this man has, is undeserving of a voice to advocate for him in our system."

It strikes me that this is no more than what Thompson may have done.

I do find it interesting, though, that no one else remembers Thompson representing this group.

More at Captain's Quarters

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, 123beta, Right Truth, Adam's Blog, Big Dog's Weblog, Stuck On Stupid, Webloggin, Leaning Straight Up, Cao's Blog, The Amboy Times, The Bullwinkle Blog, , third world county, Faultline USA, Woman Honor Thyself, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, stikNstein... has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate's Cove, Blue Star Chronicles, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 01:59 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 533 words, total size 6 kb.

I sure am -- give me Condi Rice, JC Watts, or Michael Steele and I'll vote for them in a heartbeat.

Somehow, though, I don't think they are the candidates being pushed in this article.

Could 2008 be the year that Americans put an end to an unbroken 218-year streak of electing white male presidents? Large majorities report a willingness to vote for either a woman or an African-American candidate for the office, according to the latest NEWSWEEK Poll. But those numbers drop significantly when respondents are asked whether the country is ready to accept a black or a woman in the White House.

Although 92 percent of the NEWSWEEK Poll’s respondents claim they would vote for a black candidate (up from 83 percent in 1991), only 59 percent believe the country is actually ready for an African-American president (an improvement over 37 percent in a 2000 CBS News poll). Similarly, 86 percent of voters say they would vote for a female commander in chief, but only 58 percent believe the country is ready for one (up from 40 percent in a 1996 CBS poll). Two thirds (66 percent) of voters said there was at least some chance they’d vote for Democratic Sen. Barack Obama (35 percent said there was a “good” chance, up from 20 percent last May). About as many (62 percent) said there was some chance they’d vote for Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton (43 percent said good chance, up from 33 percent). In a head-to-head race, though, Clinton dominates Obama 56 to 33 percent.

So what we see here is that almost everyone is willing to vote for a black or a woman -- but they have doubts about the rest of the country. I'd love to see the breakdown by party, since I suspect that you would find the GOP voters more willing to vote for either and more optimistic about the country's acceptance of them -- but Newsweek doesn't give us that split.

One troubling detail that the article does not report -- the continuing presence of anti-Mormon bigotry among those polled. You can bet that if there had been even a fraction of this bigotry expressed towards blacks or women, that would have been the cover story.

Posted by: Greg at 01:33 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 387 words, total size 2 kb.

It Must Suck To Have To Repay A Bribe

After all, the only reason this pardon happened is because Tony rodham lobbied his sister and brother-in-law to make it happen.

A lawyer for the brother of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said he's confident he can avoid a trial next week and settle a lawsuit that accuses Tony Rodham of failing to repay debts to a Tennessee carnival operator.

That should be a relief to Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign since the case could have revived stories about how her brothers accepted money from people pardoned by her husband, President Bill Clinton.

Rodham is accused of failing to repay $107,000 plus interest to the bankrupt estate of Edgar Allen Gregory Jr. and his wife, Vonna Jo, both of whom received a presidential pardon in 2000.

* * *

The Gregorys received pardons for a bank fraud conviction from President Clinton about two years after Rodham became a paid consultant to United Shows of America, a carnival business the couple owned.

Rodham has said he talked to his brother-in-law, who was then president, about a pardon for the Gregorys, but he said Clinton made the decision to grant clemency on the merits of their case.

Ed Gregory died in 2004, but the Gregorys have said in the past that the money they gave Rodham had nothing to do with the pardon request. They loaned Rodham $107,000 between May 2000 and February 2002, the lawsuit says. Collins said Rodham also was paid for consulting services, but he did not know the amount.

After Clinton left office, the Republican-controlled House Committee on Government Reform found that United Shows paid Rodham $240,000 for undocumented consulting services and that President Clinton was interested in the pardons solely because of his contacts with Rodham.

Unspecified consulting fees and a loan that was never repaid -- sounds like a bribe to me, under the circumstances, since it looks like the only service provided was lobbying Bill Clinton.

This would be similar to the deal that Hillary Clinton's other brother, Hugh Rodham, made with Denise Rich to get a pardon for her husband Marc Rich.

Just imagine the bribery business opportunities open to the Rodham brothers if Hillary wins the White House in 2008.

Posted by: Greg at 01:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 382 words, total size 2 kb.

Sponsored Post

I'm a fair pool player when I get the chance to play. Unfortunately, that isn't nearly as often as I would like. For that to happen, I'd have to have a pool table in my house, so that I could play on a daily basis. But where can I find quality pool tables at reasonable prices? At BostonTables.com!

Why play pool? Because it is a game or sport (depending on how you look at it) that allows for more than competition. it allows for conversation. Too often, our activities today don't. Watching television? Folks complain when you talk? Video games? Those require complete attention. But pool? You can have a lively conversation while still participating in the game. Think about it -- you'll have something to do with your family that actually allows you to engage with them. And that may be the best thing about pool -- it is a game made for friends and family.

Posted by: Greg at 06:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 161 words, total size 1 kb.

The decision against counter-terrorism surveillance of telephone calls from outside the US has been struck down.

It really isn't a surprise, both in terms of the standing issue and the precedents in the case.

After all, a Carter-era case supports warrantless searches and surveillance for national security purposes, and holds it to be an inherent presidential power. In 1980, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in United States v. Truong Dinh Hung (629 F.2d 90 , that the President did possess the authority to conduct such searches (and, by inference, wiretaps) without a warrant.

Perhaps most crucially, the executive branch not only has superior expertise in the area of foreign intelligence, it is also constitutionally designated as the pre-eminent authority in foreign affairs. . . .The President and his deputies are charged by the constitution with the conduct of the foreign policy of the United States in times of war and peace. See United States v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., 299 U.S. 304, 57 S. Ct. 216, 81 L. Ed. 255 (1936). Just as the separation of powers in Keith forced the executive to recognize a judicial role when the President conducts domestic security surveillance, 407 U.S. at 316-18, 92 S. Ct. at 2136-2137, so the separation of powers requires us to acknowledge the principal responsibility of the President for foreign affairs and concomitantly for foreign intelligence surveillance.

In sum, because of the need of the executive branch for flexibility, its practical experience, and its constitutional competence, the courts should not require the executive to secure a warrant each time it conducts foreign intelligence surveillance.

Similarly, so did the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review noted in In re: Sealed Case No. 02-001 (310 F.3d 717).

The Truong court, as did all the other courts to have decided the issue, held that the President did have inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches to obtain foreign intelligence information. It was incumbent upon the court, therefore, to determine the boundaries of that constitutional authority in the case before it. We take for granted that the President does have that authority and, assuming that is so, FISA could not encroach on the President's constitutional power.

And, as noted by one former federal prosecutor, there are a couple of dozen of examples of situations in which warrantless searches of American citizens have been upheld by various courts, up to and including the US Supreme Court.

Detain American citizens for investigative purposes without a warrant;

Arrest American citizens, based on probable cause, without a warrant;

Conduct a warrantless search of the person of an American citizen who has been detained, with or without a warrant;

Conduct a warrantless search of the home of an American citizen in order to secure the premises while a warrant is being obtained;

Conduct a warrantless search of, and seize, items belonging to American citizens that are displayed in plain view and that are obviously criminal or dangerous in nature;

Conduct a warrantless search of anything belonging to an American citizen under exigent circumstances if considerations of public safety make obtaining a warrant impractical;

Conduct a warrantless search of an American citizen's home and belongings if another person, who has apparent authority over the premises, consents;

Conduct a warrantless search of an American citizen's car anytime there is probable cause to believe it contains contraband or any evidence of a crime;

Conduct a warrantless search of any closed container inside the car of an American citizen if there is probable cause to search the car — regardless of whether there is probable cause to search the container itself;

Conduct a warrantless search of any property apparently abandoned by an American citizen;

Conduct a warrantless search of any property of an American citizen that has lawfully been seized in order to create an inventory and protect police from potential hazards or civil claims;

Conduct a warrantless search — including a strip search — at the border of any American citizen entering or leaving the United States;

Conduct a warrantless search at the border of the baggage and other property of any American citizen entering or leaving the United States;

Conduct a warrantless search of any American citizen seeking to enter a public building;

Conduct a warrantless search of random Americans at police checkpoints established for public-safety purposes (such as to detect and discourage drunk driving);

Conduct warrantless monitoring of common areas frequented by American citizens;

Conduct warrantless searches of American citizens and their vessels on the high seas;

Conduct warrantless monitoring of any telephone call or conversation of an American citizen as long as one participant in the conversation has consented to the monitoring;

Conduct warrantless searches of junkyards maintained by American citizens;

Conduct warrantless searches of docks maintained by American citizens;

Conduct warrantless searches of bars or nightclubs owned by American citizens to police underage drinking;

Conduct warrantless searches of auto-repair shops operated by American citizens;

Conduct warrantless searches of the books of American gem dealers in order to discourage traffic in stolen goods;

Conduct warrantless drug screening of American citizens working in government, emergency services, the transportation industry, and nuclear plants;

Conduct warrantless drug screening of American citizens who are school officials;

Conduct warrantless drug screening of American citizens who are school students;

Conduct warrantless searches of American citizens who are on bail, probation or parole.

And those are cases of warrantless searches and detentions of Americans that are directed at Americans -- not cases in which the words of Americans are incidentally intercepted in the course of monitoring foreign communications not covered by the protections of the US Constitution at all!

Posted by: Greg at 08:21 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 935 words, total size 7 kb.

It must suck to have to bad-talk the American economy when you have to combat these facts.

Today, The Bureau Of Labor Statistics Released New Jobs Figures – 132,000 Jobs Created In June.  Since August 2003, more than 8.2 million jobs have been created, with more than 2 million jobs created over the twelve months ending in June.  Our economy has now added jobs for 46 straight months, and the unemployment rate remains low at 4.5 percent. 

Americans Are Working And Taking Home More Pay

• Real After-Tax Per Capita Personal Income Has Risen By 9.9 Percent – Nearly $3,000 Per Person – Since President Bush Took Office.

• Real Wages Rose 1.1 Percent Over The 12 Months Ending In May.  This is faster than the average rate during the 1990s, and it means an extra $729 in the past year for the typical family with two wage earners.

• The Economy Has Now Experienced Over Five Years Of Uninterrupted Growth, Averaging 2.9 Percent A Year Since 2001.  Real GDP grew a strong 3.1 percent in 2006.

• Since The First Quarter Of 2001, Productivity Growth Has Averaged 2.8 Percent.  This is well above average productivity growth in the 1990s, 1980s, and 1970s.

• Purchasing Managers Reported Manufacturing Expansion For The Fifth Consecutive Month In June.  The Institute for Supply Management manufacturing index rose to 56 in June. 

Still, the Democrats still badmouth the American economy and try to engage in class warfare for cheap partisan advantage. The statistics prove that they are the "out-of-touch-with-reality"-based community.

H/T Blogs for Bush

Posted by: Greg at 06:28 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.

I love the fact that a number of rockers are questioning the integrity of Al Gwhore's Live Earth concerts. They include the hottest new group in the UK, who really hit the nail on the head.

Rock group Arctic Monkeys have become the latest music industry stars to question whether the performers taking part in Live Earth on Saturday are suitable climate change activists.

"It's a bit patronising for us 21 year olds to try to start to change the world," said Arctic Monkeys drummer Matt Helders, explaining why the group is not on the bill at any of Al Gore's charity concerts.

"Especially when we're using enough power for 10 houses just for (stage) lighting. It'd be a bit hypocritical," he told AFP in an interview before a concert in Paris.

Bass player Nick O'Malley chimes in: "And we're always jetting off on aeroplanes!"

I wonder -- how will those rockers (and much of the audience) get to the venues of Sydney, Tokyo, Shanghai, Hamburg, London, Johannesburg and New York? I suspect via environmentally unfriendly aircraft!

Perhaps Al Gwhore will be there selling carbon offsets indulgences to those hypocrites who actually have a conscience. I've even got a song for him to sing as he tries to scam people into believing that a cash donation will make up for their environmental sins.

Maybe that little ditty will inspire some latter-day Luthers (and some witty entrepreneurs) to upset the so-called consensus of the cult of global warming.

UPDATE: Courtesy of Thomas M., a Michelle Malkin reader.

1.) What will be the true source of the power that will power all the lighting, the amplifiers and speakers, the concessions stands? Will it be massive arrays of solar cells?, Hydrogen fusion cells?, Wind Turbines? Ethanol Bio-Fueled generators?

2.) If the latter, who (which company / manufacturer) will supply them and what model No. engine / generators will be used?

3.) Will the food (for the concessions) be cooked on wood fires? Or perhaps they will use dried out cow & horse manure pellets for fuel?

4.) Will they re-use “used toilet paper” in the restrooms (in following what a “Green” labeled performing artist has recently suggested in the media.

5.) How will the performers arrive at the concert areas as well as their Jacuzzi-equipped hotels? Will it be the normal gas-guzzling plush stretch limousines or will they opt for hybrid or Electric vehicles? Maybe they will go all out and pedal a bicycle?

6.) Will the concert tickets & concert programs be printed on the most biodegradable paper available?

7.) Where will all the proceeds as well as all of the financial pledge donations that you and LIVE EARTH are soliciting be distributed to / earmarked for?

Unless, of course, it is only the little people who are expected to be green.

MORE AT JammieWearingFool, Pirates Cove, Cao's Blog

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Outside the Beltway, Perri Nelson's Website, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, DeMediacratic Nation, Big Dog's Weblog, Right Truth, On the Horizon, Stuck On Stupid, Leaning Straight Up, The Amboy Times, Cao's Blog, Conservative Cat, Diary of the Mad Pigeon, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, stikNstein... has no mercy, The Crazy Rants of Samantha Burns, Pirate's Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Right Voices, and Church and State, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted by: Greg at 03:30 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 576 words, total size 6 kb.

The military doesn't want it. The military says it is unneeded. But Teddy Kennedy wants it anyway -- and so is acting to see that a $100 million dollar contract is for the unnecessary jet engine is awarded to a company in his state as part of a $480 million dollar appropriation for the project.

For the second year in a row the Pentagon has insisted that it doesn't need another engine for its next-generation fighter jet. And again, Senator Edward M. Kennedy and other powerful lawmakers are forcing it to build one anyway.

Tucked in the annual defense bill moving through Congress is $480 million to develop a spare engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter even though the Air Force concluded in 2005 that it was redundant -- and two independent review boards agreed.

That didn't trump pork-barrel politics.

General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn is designing the spare engine and says the project will bring jobs to the Bay State. That led Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat and member of the Armed Services Committee, to keep the project alive.

Last month, Kennedy personally "earmarked" $100 million for the engine -- more than 20 percent of its cost -- during committee deliberations over the 2008 defense authorization bill. Other lawmakers whose home states could also benefit inserted the rest of the funding.

Gee -- I wonder what a half-billion dollars could do for the troops in Iraq, who are slowly winning a war that Teddy Kennedy is seeking to undermine while using the Defense Department budget to distribute federal largesse around his state.

Posted by: Greg at 01:34 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 274 words, total size 2 kb.

And this time the victim is a former Muslim who is trying to exercise her human right to follow the religion in which she believes -- because she dared to reject the Islamic faith in which she was raised. And remember, Malaysia claims to be a secular state, despite its Muslim majority.

A Muslim-born woman who was forced to spend six months in an Islamic rehabilitation center because she wants to live as a Hindu said Friday after her release that she will never return to her original faith.

Revathi Masoosai, 29, said officials at the center tried to make her pray as a Muslim, wear a head scarf and eat beef, a practice sacrilege to Hindus.

``Because of their behavior, I loathe Islam even more now,'' she told reporters. ``They say it's a school, but it's actually a prison.''

Her case is one of a growing number of conflicts in Malaysia between religious freedom and state policies that favor Islam, the official faith of this southeast Asian nation. The battles have strained ethnic relations in the multicultural nation.

Malaysia is considered one of the world's most relaxed Muslim countries, having enjoyed racial peace for nearly four decades. But it follows a dual justice system. Islamic, Shariah, courts administer the personal affairs of Muslims, while civil courts govern Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and other religious minorities.

Under Islamic law, a person who is born Muslim cannot convert to another religion.

What is more, the Muslim religious authorities seem to believe that she can still be coerced back into Islam, so they have ordered that she live with her mother and continue to receive their "counseling -- and insist that she stay away from her husband.

What is more, the sharia courts have also seized the couple's 18-month-old daughter from her father and turned her over to Revathi's mother to be raised as a Muslim, despite the wishes of both parents to the contrary -- another violation of internationally recognized human rights norms.

This just goes to prove one of two things -- either Muslims do not qualify as human beings, or Islam is a crime against humanity. Or perhaps a third possibility -- Western nations and international organizations lack the courage to stand up and forthrightly act to end violations of human rights in the name of Islam because they fear Muslim violence.

Past Articles on Islamic violations of religious freedom in Malaysia:
Malaysian Muslims Steal Hindu Hero's Body From Family
Religious Freedom -- Islamic Style
More On Lina Joy
Malaysian Court Rules Islam Trumps Internationally Recognized Human Rights Norms
Lina Joy May Flee Malaysia

Posted by: Greg at 01:24 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 440 words, total size 3 kb.

And this time the victim is a former Muslim who is trying to exercise her human right to follow the religion in which she believes -- because she dared to reject the Islamic faith in which she was raised. And remember, Malaysia claims to be a secular state, despite its Muslim majority.

A Muslim-born woman who was forced to spend six months in an Islamic rehabilitation center because she wants to live as a Hindu said Friday after her release that she will never return to her original faith.

Revathi Masoosai, 29, said officials at the center tried to make her pray as a Muslim, wear a head scarf and eat beef, a practice sacrilege to Hindus.

``Because of their behavior, I loathe Islam even more now,'' she told reporters. ``They say it's a school, but it's actually a prison.''

Her case is one of a growing number of conflicts in Malaysia between religious freedom and state policies that favor Islam, the official faith of this southeast Asian nation. The battles have strained ethnic relations in the multicultural nation.

Malaysia is considered one of the world's most relaxed Muslim countries, having enjoyed racial peace for nearly four decades. But it follows a dual justice system. Islamic, Shariah, courts administer the personal affairs of Muslims, while civil courts govern Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and other religious minorities.

Under Islamic law, a person who is born Muslim cannot convert to another religion.

What is more, the Muslim religious authorities seem to believe that she can still be coerced back into Islam, so they have ordered that she live with her mother and continue to receive their "counseling -- and insist that she stay away from her husband.

What is more, the sharia courts have also seized the couple's 18-month-old daughter from her father and turned her over to Revathi's mother to be raised as a Muslim, despite the wishes of both parents to the contrary -- another violation of internationally recognized human rights norms.

This just goes to prove one of two things -- either Muslims do not qualify as human beings, or Islam is a crime against humanity. Or perhaps a third possibility -- Western nations and international organizations lack the courage to stand up and forthrightly act to end violations of human rights in the name of Islam because they fear Muslim violence.

Past Articles on Islamic violations of religious freedom in Malaysia:
Malaysian Muslims Steal Hindu Hero's Body From Family
Religious Freedom -- Islamic Style
More On Lina Joy
Malaysian Court Rules Islam Trumps Internationally Recognized Human Rights Norms
Lina Joy May Flee Malaysia

Posted by: Greg at 01:24 AM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Very nice site!

Posted by: John1907 at Sat May 16 03:37:00 2009 (MU91H)

2 station; buy antabuse; sterapred;

Posted by: value at Tue Oct 20 22:59:47 2009 (3yB5X)

3 middle; antabuse 500 mg;

Posted by: mark at Wed Oct 21 00:38:59 2009 (BkJkI)

4 complete; 500 antabuse mg; buy diazepam; buy lasix;

Posted by: fraction at Wed Oct 21 23:01:44 2009 (qriPM)

5 work; bangkok pharmacy zithromax;

Posted by: path at Thu Oct 22 02:23:11 2009 (YUKJy)

6 hello, great site!, acai berries, isb, acai berry power 500, >:-))), ambien generic, dcdpk, buy ambien online, rne,

Posted by: acai berries at Tue Nov 10 12:27:24 2009 (Sblo3)

7 Ne se trompez pas sur ce compte., viagra sur le net, =[[,

Posted by: Puezwlkg at Wed Nov 11 06:00:15 2009 (bcISm)

8 Dans cela quelque chose est. Vous est reconnaissant pour l'aide dans cette question. Je ne connaissais pas cela., viagra generique, 526,

Posted by: Klojalcj at Wed Nov 11 06:01:07 2009 (i1qhG)

9 just brilliant, generic ambien without prescription, =O,

Posted by: ambien generics no prescription at Wed Nov 11 16:45:55 2009 (oRpg5)

10 just brilliant, ñêà÷àòü ïðîãðàììó ìîáèëüíûé øïèîí , %-], õî÷ó ÷èòàòü ÷óæèå ñìñ , kiq, ñåêðåòû âêîíòàêòå ïðîñìîòð ôîòî , ujg, ñêà÷àòü âçëîì âêîíòàêòå , 8-], îäíîêëàññíèêè âçëîì ïàðîëÿ , ,

Posted by: ÷èòàòü ÷óæèå ñìñ îòçûâû at Fri Nov 13 04:40:39 2009 (AB5mS)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Could be -- and I'm sure that the same hard-Left Democrats who showed him no loyalty in 2006 will consider his failure to give deference to them in 2008.

U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, an independent who supports Democrats in Congress despite his backing of the Iraq war, said on Thursday he was not ruling out endorsing a Republican in the White House race.

The 2000 Democratic vice presidential candidate said he also wants to see if an independent enters the crowded field of 2008 presidential hopefuls.

"I'm going to chose whichever candidate that I think will do the best job for our country, regardless of the party affiliation of that candidate," the Connecticut senator told reporters in the state capital Hartford.

"I'm not going to get involved until after both parties have their presumptive nominees and, frankly, to see if there is a strong independent candidate," he said.

That does present some interesting possibilities, doesn't it.

Hmmmmm.... Thompson-Lieberman 2008. Does have an interesting ring to it, dontha think?

Posted by: Greg at 12:43 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 182 words, total size 1 kb.

Didn't the terrorist leader get the latest talking points from the Democrats?

A new video by al-Qaida's deputy leader Thursday left no doubt about what the terror network claims is at stake in Iraq — describing it as a centerpiece of its anti-American fight and insisting the Iraqi insurgency is under its direct leadership.

But the proclamations by Ayman al-Zawahri carried another unintended message: reflecting the current troubles confronting the Sunni extremists in Iraq, experts said.

The Islamic State of Iraq, the insurgent umbrella group that is claimed by al-Qaida, has faced ideological criticism from some militants, and rival armed groups have even joined U.S. battles against it. A U.S.-led offensive northwest of Baghdad — in one of the Islamic State's strongholds — may have temporarily disrupted and scattered insurgent forces.

"Some of the developments suggest that it (the Islamic State) is more fragile than it was before," said Bruce Hoffman, a Washington-based terrorism expert at the Rand Corp. think tank.

Al-Zawahri "is trying to replenish the Islamic State brand," he said. "It's time to reassert its viability, but how connected to reality that is, is another issue."

In the unusually long video — at just over an hour and a half — al-Zawahri depicted the Islamic State of Iraq as a vanguard for fighting off the U.S. military and eventually establishing a "caliphate" of Islamic rule across the region.

But wait -- if al-Qaeda says there are terrorists in Iraq and that it is the central front in the war on terrorism, doesn't that mean that the Democrats are wrong when they claim that neither of those things are true? Furthermore, if the Democrats succeed in getting American troops out of Iraq, doesn't that mean that they are handing al-Qaeda precisely the victory that terrorist group is seeking?

Not, of course, that the Democrats would ever seek to undercut US troops in the field and hand victory to our enemies *cough!* Vietnam *cough*.

H/T Llama Butchers

Posted by: Greg at 12:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 339 words, total size 2 kb.

Sponsored Post

Now this strikes me as an interesting way of dealing with financial problems -- selling your house and then renting it back. That is the premise behind this company -- they buy and rent back houses and other real property to so that the owners can deal with serious financial needs.

Here's how it works. They buy the home from you for about 80-85% of market value, in exchange for agreeing to allow you to rent it back. Now they can't guarantee that you can rent the house forever (economic realities do intrude), but it seems pretty clear that there is the option of renting for an extended period of time. With this sell house rent back program you get the cash, you take care of the financial issue, and you keep on renting -- and there is even a buy back option if you choose.

Is this a deal for everyone? No -- but if you have financial issues and cannot refinance, it might be the most attractive option available to you.

Posted by: Greg at 06:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.

If you have never lived in Houston, you may not have heard of Marvin Zindler, who is something of an institution down here. He is, however, known to millions of folks around the world for the character based upon him (Melvin P. Thorpe) in "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas".

Zindler has been diagnosed with pancreatic cancer which has spread to his liver.

Legendary Houston newsman Marvin Zindler is suffering from inoperable pancreatic cancer.

Zindler, who turns 86 on Aug. 10, said in a report filed for Channel 13's 6 p.m. newscast Thursday that he has pancreatic cancer that has spread to his liver.

"I don't want anybody to feel sorry for me because I'm almost 86 years old," said Zindler, who looked wan and tired in the report.

Despite the news, the consumer affairs reporter — who has worked for KTRK for 35 years and has a lifetime contract with the station — said he planned on filing reports as usual, beginning Friday with his weekly "rat and roach" restaurant report.

Rest assured that there are many prayers for him this evening -- though at 86 the prognosis is clearly not good.

They really don't make them like Marvin any more. For a couple of tastes of Zindler's style, you can look his restaurant report and his trademark sign-off. They are not to be missed!

Posted by: Greg at 04:41 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 2 kb.

Seems to me that Gov. Spitzer may be guilty of an impeachable offense -- but that he is also following his traditional pattern of using the powers of his office to settle personal political scores.

Gov. Spitzer targeted state Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno for an unprecedented State Police surveillance program that led to allegations Bruno improperly used a state helicopter for political purposes, an investigation by The Post has found.

No other state official, including Spitzer and Lt. Gov. David Paterson, was singled out for the type of detailed record-keeping the State Police maintained on Bruno, the state's most powerful Republican, official records show.

Part of the Spitzer administration's justification for homing in on Bruno - the governor's leading political adversary - is a claim that state Conservative Party leader Michael Long raised objections to Bruno's use of the State Police.

Spitzer spokesman Darren Dopp told The Post that the records on Bruno began to be assembled because "there was an incident late last year in which Mike Long called to complain about Joe bringing armed troopers to [Long's] fund-raising event.

"Long thought it was highly inappropriate, and it probably was. Recalling that incident, the [State Police] made some changes . . . and, yes, [started] keeping basic records, i.e. logs," Dopp said.

But Long insisted yesterday that he never complained about Bruno and the State Police, and that no such incident had occurred.

"That is a baldfaced lie," said Long, who has been at odds with Bruno in recent years.

"I never made a complaint to the State Police or the governor's office, and if Bruno had shown up with armed troopers I probably wouldn't have thought anything of it."

A senior state official familiar with the surveillance program told The Post that he believed the governor and his aides had sought to "set up" Bruno by having the State Police keep track of his travels.

"Why else would they do it if not to set up Bruno - by getting on him something they thought was incriminating - when they weren't doing it to anyone else?" said the official.

Bruno himself said "it appears" Spitzer and his staff used the State Police to try to obtain negative information on him in an effort to "set up an officeholder" with whom the governor disagrees.

"I would like not to believe that the governor and the people who work for him would purposely set up an officeholder of the opposing party, but it certainly appears that way," said Bruno.

Spitzer ran on a platform of "clean government" -- but it looks like he may be the dirtiest one of all. Let's hope that the state legislature takes its duty seriously and removes him immediately.

Posted by: Greg at 02:11 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 467 words, total size 3 kb.

This sounds like an overwhelmingly positive development to me.

The number of legal immigrants seeking to become United States citizens is surging, officials say, prompted by imminent increases in fees to process naturalization applications, citizenship drives across the country and new feelings of insecurity among immigrants.

That fourth word makes all the difference in my book -- and I salute them as they receive the most exalted rank that any human being can ever hold: AMERICAN CITIZEN.

Posted by: Greg at 08:12 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 85 words, total size 1 kb.

Just a little factoid to pull out next time that you hear open border advocates lament the "inhumane" policies of the United States in deporting border-jumping immigration criminals.

Those who enter Mexico illegally have committed a criminal offense, and under 1974 law are subject to two to five years in prison. This law is being revisited by federal legislators who don't want to be hypocritical in their objection to criminalizing immigration in this country.

The number of illegal immigrants detained in Mexico nearly doubled from 2002 to more than 240,000 last year. They came from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador.

For over 30 years, the Mexican government has been complaining about "harsh" US immigration policies while enforcing laws much more draconian than anything envisioned by th American government or the American people. The belated concern about hypocrisy rings quite hollow.

Posted by: Greg at 04:51 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 150 words, total size 1 kb.

"Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto" -- Juvenal

For those unfamiliar with Latin, that translates as "The will of the people is the highest law."

Today, columnist David Broder presents a different point of view, one which might well be summed up as "Screw the people!"

Let a reporter who is not running for anything suggest that exactly the opposite may be true: A particularly virulent strain of populism has made official Washington altogether too responsive to public opinion.

From Aristotle to Edmund Burke, philosophers have written of the healthy tension that normally exists between the understanding and strategies of leaders and the sentiments and opinions of their people.

In today's Washington, a badly weakened president and a dangerously compliant congressional leadership are no match for the power of public opinion -- magnified and sometimes exaggerated by modern communications and interest group pressure.

Now I'll agree with the notion that unfettered democracy is a bad thing -- hence my support of and near idolatry towards a Constitution that does place limits on what government can do, no matter what the majority wants. That is an essential feature of our system. And from time to time it might be necessary for the people and their representatives to hold their noses and acquiesce to unpopular legislation or policies that produce a substantive benefit to the nation as a whole.

However, Broder's gripe is that the Senate and House are unwilling to shove a bad immigration bill down the throats of an American people who are screaming their opposition. He defines listening to the collective wisdom of the American people as "failure", and ignoring our voices as "leadership".

I'm sorry, but his position is akin to claiming that a rapist might be justified in continuing his forcible violation of a screaming, struggling woman on the grounds that there might be a higher good that comes out of the assault, and that the victim is somehow obliged to lay back and enjoy it. Knowing that Broder is a decent man, I am sure he would never advocate such a thing if the victim were his granddaughter -- and he should be ashamed to advocate it when the victim would be the American people.

Posted by: Greg at 04:45 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 376 words, total size 2 kb.

Does the WaPo profile of Jonathan Edwards' hairstylist reveal a possible violation of federal campaign finance law?

Torrenueva provided his first five haircuts for Edwards in late 2003 and early 2004 free of charge. "I was just doing it because I'm a Democrat," he said.

That the Post is doing a profile of the candidate's hairstylist is a sign on how non-substantive a candidate Edwards really is. But consider the implications of that little excerpt above.

Wasn't Edwards a presidential candidate at the time? Would they constitute in-kind contributions? Were these contributions properly reported on his FEC disclosures? Is Torrenueva incorporated for business purposes, and if he is do those haircuts constitute illegal corporate contributions to the Edwards campaign? And if Torrenueva also gave cash to the campaign, did the combined total value of the haircuts and cash exceed the legal limit for campaign contributions?

UPDATE: 7/6/2007: Looks like Mark L. Jackson and Debbie Schlussel are asking the same question I am.

Posted by: Greg at 04:23 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 178 words, total size 1 kb.