Many people assume that because I am a Conservative that I follow the Party Line unquestioningly and loved the Republican Presidencies.
One cannot rehabilitate any Republican or Democrat's Presidency and call themselves honest.
Bush is no hero. Entering Iraq under false pretenses was an atrocity. The only question in my mind is whether or not Bush shared the same knowledge that Cheney, Rumsfeld and Colin Powell had and who was pulling the strings. During Reagan, we had Iran Contra; during Bush I we had Desert Storm; and during Bush II, we have our current mess. The Gulf involvement concerns Oil and KBR profits more than freedom promotion. During Clinton, we had Monica Gate, Whitewater, Paula Jones, and we lost troops in the Balkans and Africa. We have Republicans who want to make money for Corporate America and Democrats who are in the pocket of special interests.
You know what scares me the most? If one accepts the proposition that politicians were and are willing to sacrifice American youth overseas in the name of profits, and justify that loss later by saying it promotes freedom, then that means our leaders are nothing more than sociopaths. If Clinton ordered troop movements during Monica Gate just to keep his poll numbers up, he is no better.
We fought Gulf one for the oil companies, and Gulf II for Dick Cheney, KBR and the oil companies. We spent billions on SDI during the Reagan years and have nothing to show for it. Our defenses get so weak during Democrat Presidencies, that people are afraid to re-elect them. The left clamors for people's rights while previously under identified or unidentified terrorists crash planes into buildings. The right claims that if we trade freedom for security, we will have neither.
We need a strong national defense that is based in defense of our borders and American, not Corporate America's interests abroad. We need a secure Southern Border and an extremely strong deterrent capability. Stationing Troops all over the world strikes me as creating a global police force. Nation building, without any hope of return, is pointless. Until we get our own house in order, the world must wait. We need strong, honest, and reliable human intelligence and that is central to any defense.
We cannot allow Americans to starve. On the other hand, we also cannot afford doling out trillions in aid to persons who are under-employed by choice or not doing contributing his or her part. We need to differentiate reproduction from parenting. Any person with Sperm or an Ova can reproduce. It takes a responsible, self-less, dedicated and devoted person to be a parent. We have no one to blame but ourselves for the current credit crises, we all bought homes with no down and ran up credit card debt just like the feds and the budget. Now Corporate America wants a bail out, Americans want a bail out and we are watching our money drain right down a funnel into China's greedy gullet.
Think about it, this Country has not had a successful presidency in our lifetimes. We are doomed unless things suddenly and drastically change.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Dear President Reagan
First Happy Birthday, you were a good man and I am sure you are having a good time in heaven. You inspired many conservatives and your popularity only has grown since you shuffled off this mortal coil. Almost everyone hopes to inherit your legacy and the wide base you commanded. You were labeled the Great Communicator by some, and the Teflon President by your detractors and it seems that history has been kind to your presidency thus far.
On the other hand, I was not all that thrilled with your presidency. You spent mega bucks on SDI and we never got any return on that boondoggle. You did nothing to protect American jobs, and subsequently took a 7 million dollar speaking fee from the Japanese shortly after leaving office. You cut medicaid benefits to kids in college whose parents had died and gave a tax cut to the rich at the same time. Your infamous secretary of agriculture made ketchup a vegetable in school lunches and the block grants you were so proud of never made a bit of difference in the size of the Federal Government. You kept us in Lebanon too long and as the result, 200 fine young men were killed. You and your administration take all the credit for the fall of the Soviet Union when history tells you knew the rough shape and the imminent collapse of the USSR almost four months before when you told Gorbechev to "Tear down that wall."
For all of Gary Hart's philandering, and his neo-socialist agenda he did have one thing right. Instead of SDI, we could have accomplished the same thing with many smaller nuclear armed subs and small ships moving around the ocean and had them also armed with Anti Ballistic Missiles. That, at least, would have been also a boon to our infrastructure instead of all that money being wasted on R & D at General Dynamics on no bid contracts. ... See More
Give me Robert Taft Senior for president.
The only way this country will survive is if a real American Conservative is willing to throw themselves on their sword in almost Christ like fashion and make draconian cuts in social programs, foreign military spending, and impose a national sales tax along with a flat tax. We need to remove all taxes from retirement investments, allow everyone who wants to go into medical school into it, pass real litigation reform, give massive tax benefits to non-profit insurance companies and slowly shift all risk from for profit insurance.
Regarding foreign policy, the new president should announce on day one of his inaugural speech that we are calling home every foreign based soldier and impounding every foreign military and foreign aid expenditure. He simultaneously announces that every ex-patriot has exactly 60 days to get home. After that, if a foreign enemy takes them or any other American traveling overseas hostage, they will be declared casualties of war and we launch drones on their location.
If we have a strategic interest in a region of the world, we announce that is a strategic location zone. If anyone attacks it, we turn it and the country attacking it to glass from above. Make shock and awe look like the grand opening of the corner coffee shop.
If some nut job overseas starts killing his own civilians and Americans want to help, we will allow them to apply for a permit and if it does not go against our national interests, they can organize their own battalions and we can offer them our facilities for training purposes. They can fight the nut jobs directly.
On the home front, every person living here at our sufferance swears allegiance to the United States and its Constitution. If they are unwilling to do that, they are deported. Every person living in the US will also be given six months to learn English and pass a basic writing and speaking exam.
While we are at it, let us also make two years of post high school public service mandatory and higher education free for all those who academically qualify after they are done with their two years of service.
All welfare recipients would have to be drug tested to get welfare.
We set up a bounty system for the capture of illegal aliens. Just like getting a conceal carry permit, one could go to their local law enforcement agency, get a permit as a illegal alien bounty hunter and the feds pay them a reward for every one that they return to a check point / processing center at the US Mexican Border. We will use some of that high tech gadgetry we have and mount laser cannons and Gatling guns on our southern border, shoot everything that moves in a two mile no man's zone at our border and x-ray every cargo box coming into this country.
Of course that will free up a lot of manual labor jobs. If one has a job like that available, they will simply notify the welfare office and it will be given to a recipient or lose their benefits.
Finally, we start giving real tax benefits to the educated middle class to have more children. Give them low cost housing that has been built by those on welfare or doing their public service. Welfare recipients will be learning the construction trade and at the same time, those who are benefiting society the most will also reap its benefits.
None of the above solutions are rocket science and they all make common sense.
Warmest Regards;
Chuck
On the other hand, I was not all that thrilled with your presidency. You spent mega bucks on SDI and we never got any return on that boondoggle. You did nothing to protect American jobs, and subsequently took a 7 million dollar speaking fee from the Japanese shortly after leaving office. You cut medicaid benefits to kids in college whose parents had died and gave a tax cut to the rich at the same time. Your infamous secretary of agriculture made ketchup a vegetable in school lunches and the block grants you were so proud of never made a bit of difference in the size of the Federal Government. You kept us in Lebanon too long and as the result, 200 fine young men were killed. You and your administration take all the credit for the fall of the Soviet Union when history tells you knew the rough shape and the imminent collapse of the USSR almost four months before when you told Gorbechev to "Tear down that wall."
For all of Gary Hart's philandering, and his neo-socialist agenda he did have one thing right. Instead of SDI, we could have accomplished the same thing with many smaller nuclear armed subs and small ships moving around the ocean and had them also armed with Anti Ballistic Missiles. That, at least, would have been also a boon to our infrastructure instead of all that money being wasted on R & D at General Dynamics on no bid contracts. ... See More
Give me Robert Taft Senior for president.
The only way this country will survive is if a real American Conservative is willing to throw themselves on their sword in almost Christ like fashion and make draconian cuts in social programs, foreign military spending, and impose a national sales tax along with a flat tax. We need to remove all taxes from retirement investments, allow everyone who wants to go into medical school into it, pass real litigation reform, give massive tax benefits to non-profit insurance companies and slowly shift all risk from for profit insurance.
Regarding foreign policy, the new president should announce on day one of his inaugural speech that we are calling home every foreign based soldier and impounding every foreign military and foreign aid expenditure. He simultaneously announces that every ex-patriot has exactly 60 days to get home. After that, if a foreign enemy takes them or any other American traveling overseas hostage, they will be declared casualties of war and we launch drones on their location.
If we have a strategic interest in a region of the world, we announce that is a strategic location zone. If anyone attacks it, we turn it and the country attacking it to glass from above. Make shock and awe look like the grand opening of the corner coffee shop.
If some nut job overseas starts killing his own civilians and Americans want to help, we will allow them to apply for a permit and if it does not go against our national interests, they can organize their own battalions and we can offer them our facilities for training purposes. They can fight the nut jobs directly.
On the home front, every person living here at our sufferance swears allegiance to the United States and its Constitution. If they are unwilling to do that, they are deported. Every person living in the US will also be given six months to learn English and pass a basic writing and speaking exam.
While we are at it, let us also make two years of post high school public service mandatory and higher education free for all those who academically qualify after they are done with their two years of service.
All welfare recipients would have to be drug tested to get welfare.
We set up a bounty system for the capture of illegal aliens. Just like getting a conceal carry permit, one could go to their local law enforcement agency, get a permit as a illegal alien bounty hunter and the feds pay them a reward for every one that they return to a check point / processing center at the US Mexican Border. We will use some of that high tech gadgetry we have and mount laser cannons and Gatling guns on our southern border, shoot everything that moves in a two mile no man's zone at our border and x-ray every cargo box coming into this country.
Of course that will free up a lot of manual labor jobs. If one has a job like that available, they will simply notify the welfare office and it will be given to a recipient or lose their benefits.
Finally, we start giving real tax benefits to the educated middle class to have more children. Give them low cost housing that has been built by those on welfare or doing their public service. Welfare recipients will be learning the construction trade and at the same time, those who are benefiting society the most will also reap its benefits.
None of the above solutions are rocket science and they all make common sense.
Warmest Regards;
Chuck
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Taliban cut off fingers of 2 Afghan voters
Taliban cut off fingers of 2 Afghan voters
By HEIDI VOGT, Associated Press Writer Heidi Vogt, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 6 mins ago
KABUL – Taliban militants cut off the ink-stained fingers of two Afghan voters in the militant south during the presidential election, the country's top election monitoring group said Saturday.
Two voters who had dipped their index fingers in purple ink — a fraud prevention measure — were attacked in Kandahar province shortly after voting Thursday, said Nader Nadery, the head of the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan. Kandahar is the spiritual birthplace of the Taliban.
Rumors that militants would cut off voters' ink-stained fingers spread before the vote. A Taliban spokesman had said militants would not carry out such attacks, but the Taliban is a loose organization of individual commanders who could carry out the threat on their own.
Millions of Afghans voted in the country's second-ever direct presidential election, although Taliban threats and attacks appeared to hold down the turnout, especially in the south where President Hamid Karzai was expected to run strongly among his fellow Pashtuns. At least 26 Afghan civilians and security forces died in dozens of militant attacks.
If results show that vastly more people voted in the north than the south, "then we will have an issue," Nadery said.
Fewer votes in the south would harm the chances of Karzai to win a second five-year term, and increase the chances that his top challenger, former Foreign Minster Abdullah Abdullah, could pull off an upset.
If neither candidate gets 50 percent in the first round, they will go to a second round runoff. Initial preliminary results won't be announced until Tuesday, and final results won't be certified until mid-September.
Nadery said his group saw widespread problems of election officials who were not impartial and were pressuring people to vote for certain candidates. Election monitors also saw voters carrying boxes of voter cards — so many votes could be cast — to polling sites and saw many underage voters, he said.
On Saturday, one of the longshot presidential candidates displayed torn and mangled ballot papers that he said had been cast for him and tossed away by election workers who support Karzai.
Mirwais Yasini, a parliamentarian, stood behind a table piled with ballot papers that he said his supporters had found ditched outside Spin Boldak city in southern Kandahar province. The ballots bore the stamp of the Independent Election Commission, which is applied only after they are used for voting.
"Thousands of them were burned," he said.
Both Karzai and Abdullah claimed to be ahead in early vote counting. Karzai's campaign insisted Friday he would have enough votes to avoid a runoff. Abdullah countered that he was leading but suspected there would be a runoff.
Election officials called on the candidates to refrain from such claims, which could delay the formation of a new government.
Officials of Afghan and international monitoring teams agreed it was too early to say who won or to know whether fraud was extensive enough to affect the outcome. Fraud complaints are being filed with a commission that will rule on all allegations.
Though monitors with the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan were present in all 34 provinces, international monitoring groups were restricted by security concerns. The Washington, D.C.-based National Democratic Institute only had observers in 19 provinces, passing over many violent areas of the south and east.
European Union observers had difficulty getting to polling stations in southern Kandahar province because of rocket attacks, said Sandra Khadhouri, a spokeswoman for the delegation. The EU had observers in 17 provinces.
"That elections took place at all is a notable achievement," the EU said in a statement. The delegation said threats and violence meant that voting could not be considered free "in some parts of the territory" but that the process so far appeared "good and fair."
The National Democratic Institute also said it saw orderly voting, but said the vote also "involved serious flaws that must be addressed in order to build greater confidence in the integrity of future elections."
The group pointed to the lack of a voters' list and the fact that members of the Independent Election Commission are appointed by the incumbent, suggesting a likelihood of bias.
It said violence disrupted voting in the south and southeast, which appeared to repress turnout, especially among women.
___
Associated Press writer Amir Shah contributed to this report.
By HEIDI VOGT, Associated Press Writer Heidi Vogt, Associated Press Writer 1 hr 6 mins ago
KABUL – Taliban militants cut off the ink-stained fingers of two Afghan voters in the militant south during the presidential election, the country's top election monitoring group said Saturday.
Two voters who had dipped their index fingers in purple ink — a fraud prevention measure — were attacked in Kandahar province shortly after voting Thursday, said Nader Nadery, the head of the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan. Kandahar is the spiritual birthplace of the Taliban.
Rumors that militants would cut off voters' ink-stained fingers spread before the vote. A Taliban spokesman had said militants would not carry out such attacks, but the Taliban is a loose organization of individual commanders who could carry out the threat on their own.
Millions of Afghans voted in the country's second-ever direct presidential election, although Taliban threats and attacks appeared to hold down the turnout, especially in the south where President Hamid Karzai was expected to run strongly among his fellow Pashtuns. At least 26 Afghan civilians and security forces died in dozens of militant attacks.
If results show that vastly more people voted in the north than the south, "then we will have an issue," Nadery said.
Fewer votes in the south would harm the chances of Karzai to win a second five-year term, and increase the chances that his top challenger, former Foreign Minster Abdullah Abdullah, could pull off an upset.
If neither candidate gets 50 percent in the first round, they will go to a second round runoff. Initial preliminary results won't be announced until Tuesday, and final results won't be certified until mid-September.
Nadery said his group saw widespread problems of election officials who were not impartial and were pressuring people to vote for certain candidates. Election monitors also saw voters carrying boxes of voter cards — so many votes could be cast — to polling sites and saw many underage voters, he said.
On Saturday, one of the longshot presidential candidates displayed torn and mangled ballot papers that he said had been cast for him and tossed away by election workers who support Karzai.
Mirwais Yasini, a parliamentarian, stood behind a table piled with ballot papers that he said his supporters had found ditched outside Spin Boldak city in southern Kandahar province. The ballots bore the stamp of the Independent Election Commission, which is applied only after they are used for voting.
"Thousands of them were burned," he said.
Both Karzai and Abdullah claimed to be ahead in early vote counting. Karzai's campaign insisted Friday he would have enough votes to avoid a runoff. Abdullah countered that he was leading but suspected there would be a runoff.
Election officials called on the candidates to refrain from such claims, which could delay the formation of a new government.
Officials of Afghan and international monitoring teams agreed it was too early to say who won or to know whether fraud was extensive enough to affect the outcome. Fraud complaints are being filed with a commission that will rule on all allegations.
Though monitors with the Free and Fair Election Foundation of Afghanistan were present in all 34 provinces, international monitoring groups were restricted by security concerns. The Washington, D.C.-based National Democratic Institute only had observers in 19 provinces, passing over many violent areas of the south and east.
European Union observers had difficulty getting to polling stations in southern Kandahar province because of rocket attacks, said Sandra Khadhouri, a spokeswoman for the delegation. The EU had observers in 17 provinces.
"That elections took place at all is a notable achievement," the EU said in a statement. The delegation said threats and violence meant that voting could not be considered free "in some parts of the territory" but that the process so far appeared "good and fair."
The National Democratic Institute also said it saw orderly voting, but said the vote also "involved serious flaws that must be addressed in order to build greater confidence in the integrity of future elections."
The group pointed to the lack of a voters' list and the fact that members of the Independent Election Commission are appointed by the incumbent, suggesting a likelihood of bias.
It said violence disrupted voting in the south and southeast, which appeared to repress turnout, especially among women.
___
Associated Press writer Amir Shah contributed to this report.
Friday, August 21, 2009
2-month-old killed to stifle 'religious' dissent Reports cite victim being used for 'target practice'
FAITH UNDER FIRE
2-month-old killed to stifle 'religious' dissent
Reports cite victim being used for 'target practice'
Posted: August 20, 2009
9:30 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Editor's note: The following contains disturbing and graphic descriptions of attacks on Christians.
An international Christian group has reported a horrifying episode of Christian children being abducted and killed in an apparent effort to stifle "religious and political" dissidents in Laos during the runup to a visit by U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va.
Webb, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia, recently visited several nations, including some that often have earned high rankings among nations that persecute Christians. His trip included visits to Burma, Vietnam, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia.
Now comes a report from International Christian Concern about the newest atrocities.
"International Christian Concern has just learned that Lao soldiers captured, mutilated and decapitated a two-month-old girl during recent military attacks against Hmong and Laotian civilians," the group said. "Survivors of the attack said the infant was used for target practice."
(Story continues below)
ICC cited reports from the Center for Public Policy Analysis that claimed eight children were captured and 26 Hmong and Laotian civilians were murdered during a series of four major attacks over the past month – apparently designed to stifle "religious and political dissidents" ahead of the visit from Webb.
"Christian Hmong were most certainly among those attacked as they are often targeted specifically by the regime," the report said.
The report included a statement from Vaughn Vang, the director of thet Lao Hmong Human Rights Council.
"We are told, by some of the Lao Hmong survivors of the recent military attacks in Laos, that the LPDR (Lao Peoples Democratic Republic) soldiers of the LPA (Lao Peoples Army) used the … Lao Hmong girl, while she was still alive, for target practice … once she was captured and tied up; they mutilated her little body and continued to fire their weapons, over and over … until her head just eventually came off after so many bullets severed her head."
The rest of the children, ranging up to 8 years old, remain missing and Vang's concern is that they likely would be tortured and killed by soldiers.
The ICC report said the decapitated child's body was found next to her mother, also a torture victim of the soldiers.
"Unfortunately," the ICC said, "this level of brutality against women and children is not uncommon for Lao soldiers. It is standard procedure for soldiers to surround and isolate pockets of Hmong people and starve them out to be killed when they venture out to forage.
"Philip Smith, the Executive Director of CPPA, told ICC of video footage smuggled out of Laos in 2004 that documents the aftermath of the killing and brutalization of five Hmong children, four of them girls, on May 19th of that year. That footage was used in an extremely graphic documentary, "Hunted Like Animals," by Rebecca Sommer," the report said.
The videos are available at RebeccaSommer.org, but ICC warns the clips are "highly graphic." The website warns that no children should view the clips.
"Rights groups have rightly called the acts the Lao military commits against children and civilians war crimes," said Natalia Rain, ICC"s regional manager for East Asia. "Let the international community not be guilty of the same by its silence in the face of a regime who has already been allowed so much room that it has reached the heights of sadism in the torture and decapitation of a two-month-old little girl."
Webb said in a website statement the U.S. needs to "re-engage with Southeast Asia at all levels."
"Our relations with Laos," he said, "have never been fully repaired since the end of the Vietnam War more than 30 years ago."
During his time in Laos, his schedule included meetings with the nation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of National Defense.
According to the RebeccaSommers.org website, the Hmong people of southeast Asia, many of whom cooperated with American forces during the Vietnam War, still are hunted and killed for actions of four decades ago.
Open Doors USA ranks Laos No. 8 on its 2009 World Watch List of nations that persecute Christians.
The World Watch List is compiled from a specially designed questionnaire of 50 questions covering various aspects of religious freedom. A point value is assigned depending on how each question is answered. The total number of points per country determines its position on the World Watch List.
"It is certainly not a shock that North Korea is No. 1 on the list of countries where Christians face the worst persecution," said Carl Moeller, president of Open Doors USA. "There is no other country in the world where Christians are persecuted in such a horrible and systematic manner."
The organization estimates 100 million Christians worldwide suffer interrogation, arrest and even death for their faith in Christ, with millions more facing discrimination and alienation.
2-month-old killed to stifle 'religious' dissent
Reports cite victim being used for 'target practice'
Posted: August 20, 2009
9:30 pm Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
Editor's note: The following contains disturbing and graphic descriptions of attacks on Christians.
An international Christian group has reported a horrifying episode of Christian children being abducted and killed in an apparent effort to stifle "religious and political" dissidents in Laos during the runup to a visit by U.S. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va.
Webb, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia, recently visited several nations, including some that often have earned high rankings among nations that persecute Christians. His trip included visits to Burma, Vietnam, Thailand, Laos and Cambodia.
Now comes a report from International Christian Concern about the newest atrocities.
"International Christian Concern has just learned that Lao soldiers captured, mutilated and decapitated a two-month-old girl during recent military attacks against Hmong and Laotian civilians," the group said. "Survivors of the attack said the infant was used for target practice."
(Story continues below)
ICC cited reports from the Center for Public Policy Analysis that claimed eight children were captured and 26 Hmong and Laotian civilians were murdered during a series of four major attacks over the past month – apparently designed to stifle "religious and political dissidents" ahead of the visit from Webb.
"Christian Hmong were most certainly among those attacked as they are often targeted specifically by the regime," the report said.
The report included a statement from Vaughn Vang, the director of thet Lao Hmong Human Rights Council.
"We are told, by some of the Lao Hmong survivors of the recent military attacks in Laos, that the LPDR (Lao Peoples Democratic Republic) soldiers of the LPA (Lao Peoples Army) used the … Lao Hmong girl, while she was still alive, for target practice … once she was captured and tied up; they mutilated her little body and continued to fire their weapons, over and over … until her head just eventually came off after so many bullets severed her head."
The rest of the children, ranging up to 8 years old, remain missing and Vang's concern is that they likely would be tortured and killed by soldiers.
The ICC report said the decapitated child's body was found next to her mother, also a torture victim of the soldiers.
"Unfortunately," the ICC said, "this level of brutality against women and children is not uncommon for Lao soldiers. It is standard procedure for soldiers to surround and isolate pockets of Hmong people and starve them out to be killed when they venture out to forage.
"Philip Smith, the Executive Director of CPPA, told ICC of video footage smuggled out of Laos in 2004 that documents the aftermath of the killing and brutalization of five Hmong children, four of them girls, on May 19th of that year. That footage was used in an extremely graphic documentary, "Hunted Like Animals," by Rebecca Sommer," the report said.
The videos are available at RebeccaSommer.org, but ICC warns the clips are "highly graphic." The website warns that no children should view the clips.
"Rights groups have rightly called the acts the Lao military commits against children and civilians war crimes," said Natalia Rain, ICC"s regional manager for East Asia. "Let the international community not be guilty of the same by its silence in the face of a regime who has already been allowed so much room that it has reached the heights of sadism in the torture and decapitation of a two-month-old little girl."
Webb said in a website statement the U.S. needs to "re-engage with Southeast Asia at all levels."
"Our relations with Laos," he said, "have never been fully repaired since the end of the Vietnam War more than 30 years ago."
During his time in Laos, his schedule included meetings with the nation's Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of National Defense.
According to the RebeccaSommers.org website, the Hmong people of southeast Asia, many of whom cooperated with American forces during the Vietnam War, still are hunted and killed for actions of four decades ago.
Open Doors USA ranks Laos No. 8 on its 2009 World Watch List of nations that persecute Christians.
The World Watch List is compiled from a specially designed questionnaire of 50 questions covering various aspects of religious freedom. A point value is assigned depending on how each question is answered. The total number of points per country determines its position on the World Watch List.
"It is certainly not a shock that North Korea is No. 1 on the list of countries where Christians face the worst persecution," said Carl Moeller, president of Open Doors USA. "There is no other country in the world where Christians are persecuted in such a horrible and systematic manner."
The organization estimates 100 million Christians worldwide suffer interrogation, arrest and even death for their faith in Christ, with millions more facing discrimination and alienation.
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
People never cease to amaze me.
Just thought you would find this interesting. It is from the order barring discovery of the names of all the defendants in the September 11 attacks. Here you have seasoned attorneys, some of the best in the business, and they did not make a 120 deadline that essentially cost them the one thing they were hoping to obtain for their clients. Their clients were foregoing literally millions of dollars in settlement money from the compensation fund because they are more interested in the truth of who is behind the 911 attacks. This litigation has drug on now for almost eight years and the plaintiff's own attorney shoots them in the foot. Go figure.
This is excerpted from-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------- x
IN RE SEPTEMBER 11 LITIGATION :
::
------------------------------------------------------- x
ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, U.S.D.J.:
OPINION AND ORDER
DENYING MOTION TO SET ASIDE CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS
21 MC 101 (AKH)
I hold that the Martindell standard applies to Plaintiffs’ motion because the Aviation Defendants have reasonably relied on the CPO. Their reliance has been reasonable because Plaintiffs have never objected to the Aviation Defendants’ confidentiality designations within 120 days, as required by Paragraph 5.1 of the CPO. Had Plaintiffs done so, the CPO would have shifted the burden to the Aviation Defendants to justify those designations. However, as the periods have lapsed with no objections, the Aviation Defendants have become entitled to rely on the CPO in settling cases, producing documents and witnesses for depositions, and reconciling discovery disputes. See Allen v. City of New York, 420 F. Supp. 2d 295, 300-01 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (“The classic situation in which a party ‘relies’ on a protective order is where the party creates material during the course of litigation on the understanding that it will be kept confidential.”). Plaintiffs do not address their failures to object within 120 days of particular confidentiality designations. In fact, they have not challenged any designations through the procedure established by the CPO, which they proposed with the Aviation Defendants in 2004. They note that they filed their initial motion to set aside designations promptly in October 2007, after the Aviation Defendants had produced only 50,000 pages of discovery. However, they cannot explain why they have ignored the CPO procedure, and why they seek to set aside the Aviation Defendants’ designations now, after about one million pages have been produced.
This is excerpted from-
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
------------------------------------------------------- x
IN RE SEPTEMBER 11 LITIGATION :
::
------------------------------------------------------- x
ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, U.S.D.J.:
OPINION AND ORDER
DENYING MOTION TO SET ASIDE CONFIDENTIALITY DESIGNATIONS
21 MC 101 (AKH)
I hold that the Martindell standard applies to Plaintiffs’ motion because the Aviation Defendants have reasonably relied on the CPO. Their reliance has been reasonable because Plaintiffs have never objected to the Aviation Defendants’ confidentiality designations within 120 days, as required by Paragraph 5.1 of the CPO. Had Plaintiffs done so, the CPO would have shifted the burden to the Aviation Defendants to justify those designations. However, as the periods have lapsed with no objections, the Aviation Defendants have become entitled to rely on the CPO in settling cases, producing documents and witnesses for depositions, and reconciling discovery disputes. See Allen v. City of New York, 420 F. Supp. 2d 295, 300-01 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (“The classic situation in which a party ‘relies’ on a protective order is where the party creates material during the course of litigation on the understanding that it will be kept confidential.”). Plaintiffs do not address their failures to object within 120 days of particular confidentiality designations. In fact, they have not challenged any designations through the procedure established by the CPO, which they proposed with the Aviation Defendants in 2004. They note that they filed their initial motion to set aside designations promptly in October 2007, after the Aviation Defendants had produced only 50,000 pages of discovery. However, they cannot explain why they have ignored the CPO procedure, and why they seek to set aside the Aviation Defendants’ designations now, after about one million pages have been produced.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
HEALTH CARE REFORM
The current national debate about health care reform should concern all of us. There is much at stake in this political struggle, and also much confusion and inaccurate information being thrown around. My brother bishops have described some clear “goal-posts” to mark out what is acceptable reform, and what must be rejected. First and most important, the Church will not accept any legislation that mandates coverage, public or private, for abortion, euthanasia, or embryonic stem-cell research. We refuse to be made complicit in these evils, which frankly contradict what “health care” should mean. We refuse to allow our own parish, school, and diocesan health insurance plans to be forced to include these evils. As a corollary of this, we insist equally on adequate protection of individual rights of conscience for patients and health care providers not to be made complicit in these evils. A so-called reform that imposes these evils on us would be far worse than keeping the health care system we now have.
Second, the Catholic Church does not teach that “health care” as such, without distinction, is a natural right. The “natural right” of health care is the divine bounty of food, water, and air without which all of us quickly die. This bounty comes from God directly. None of us own it, and none of us can morally withhold it from others. The remainder of health care is a political, not a natural, right, because it comes from our human efforts, creativity, and compassion. As a political right, health care should be apportioned according to need, not ability to pay or to benefit from the care. We reject the rationing of care. Those who are sickest should get the most care, regardless of age, status, or wealth. But how to do this is not self-evident. The decisions that we must collectively make about how to administer health care therefore fall under “prudential judgment.”
Third, in that category of prudential judgment, the Catholic Church does not teach that government should directly provide health care. Unlike a prudential concern like national defense, for which government monopolization is objectively good – it both limits violence overall and prevents the obvious abuses to which private armies are susceptible – health care should not be subject to federal monopolization. Preserving patient choice (through a flourishing private sector) is the only way to prevent a health care monopoly from denying care arbitrarily, as we learned from HMOs in the recent past. While a government monopoly would not be motivated by profit, it would be motivated by such bureaucratic standards as quotas and defined “best procedures,” which are equally beyond the influence of most citizens. The proper role of the government is to regulate the private sector, in order to foster healthy competition and to curtail abuses. Therefore any legislation that undermines the viability of the private sector is suspect. Private, religious hospitals and nursing homes, in particular, should be protected, because these are the ones most vigorously offering actual health care to the poorest of the poor.
The best way in practice to approach this balance of public and private roles is to spread the risks and costs of health care over the largest number of people. This is the principle underlying Medicaid and Medicare taxes, for example. But this principle assumes that the pool of taxable workers is sufficiently large, compared to those who draw the benefits, to be reasonably inexpensive and just. This assumption is at root a pro-life assumption! Indeed, we were a culture of life when such programs began. Only if we again foster a culture of life can we perpetuate the economic justice of taxing workers to pay health care for the poor. Without a growing population of youth, our growing population of retirees is outstripping our distribution systems. In a culture of death such as we have now, taxation to redistribute costs of medical care becomes both unjust and unsustainable.
Fourth, preventative care is a moral obligation of the individual to God and to his or her family and loved ones, not a right to be demanded from society. The gift of life comes only from God; to spurn that gift by seriously mistreating our own health is morally wrong. The most effective preventative care for most people is essentially free – good diet, moderate exercise, and sufficient sleep. But pre-natal and neo-natal care are examples of preventative care requiring medical expertise, and therefore cost; and this sort of care should be made available to all as far as possible.
Within these limits, the Church has been advocating for decades that health care be made more accessible to all, especially to the poor. Will the current health care reform proposals achieve these goals?
The current House reform bill, HR 3200, does not meet the first or the fourth standard. As Cardinal Justin Rigali has written for the USCCB Secretariat of Pro-life Activities, this bill circumvents the Hyde amendment (which prohibits federal funds from being used to pay for abortions) by drawing funding from new sources not covered by the Hyde amendment, and by creatively manipulating how federal funds covered by the Hyde amendment are accounted. It also provides a “public insurance option” without adequate limits, so that smaller employers especially will have a financial incentive to push all their employees into this public insurance. This will effectively prevent those employees from choosing any private insurance plans. This will saddle the working classes with additional taxes for inefficient and immoral entitlements. The Senate bill, HELP, is better than the House bill, as I understand it. It subsidizes care for the poor, rather than tending to monopolize care. But, it designates the limit of four times federal poverty level for the public insurance option, which still includes more than half of all workers. This would impinge on the vitality of the private sector. It also does not meet the first standard of explicitly excluding mandatory abortion coverage.
I encourage all of you to make you voice heard to our representatives in Congress. Tell them what they need to hear from us: no health care reform is better than the wrong sort of health care reform. Insist that they not permit themselves to be railroaded into the current too-costly and pro-abortion health care proposals. Insist on their support for proposals that respect the life and dignity of every human person, especially the unborn. And above all, pray for them, and for our country.
Most Reverend R. Walker Nickless
Bishop of Sioux City
Second, the Catholic Church does not teach that “health care” as such, without distinction, is a natural right. The “natural right” of health care is the divine bounty of food, water, and air without which all of us quickly die. This bounty comes from God directly. None of us own it, and none of us can morally withhold it from others. The remainder of health care is a political, not a natural, right, because it comes from our human efforts, creativity, and compassion. As a political right, health care should be apportioned according to need, not ability to pay or to benefit from the care. We reject the rationing of care. Those who are sickest should get the most care, regardless of age, status, or wealth. But how to do this is not self-evident. The decisions that we must collectively make about how to administer health care therefore fall under “prudential judgment.”
Third, in that category of prudential judgment, the Catholic Church does not teach that government should directly provide health care. Unlike a prudential concern like national defense, for which government monopolization is objectively good – it both limits violence overall and prevents the obvious abuses to which private armies are susceptible – health care should not be subject to federal monopolization. Preserving patient choice (through a flourishing private sector) is the only way to prevent a health care monopoly from denying care arbitrarily, as we learned from HMOs in the recent past. While a government monopoly would not be motivated by profit, it would be motivated by such bureaucratic standards as quotas and defined “best procedures,” which are equally beyond the influence of most citizens. The proper role of the government is to regulate the private sector, in order to foster healthy competition and to curtail abuses. Therefore any legislation that undermines the viability of the private sector is suspect. Private, religious hospitals and nursing homes, in particular, should be protected, because these are the ones most vigorously offering actual health care to the poorest of the poor.
The best way in practice to approach this balance of public and private roles is to spread the risks and costs of health care over the largest number of people. This is the principle underlying Medicaid and Medicare taxes, for example. But this principle assumes that the pool of taxable workers is sufficiently large, compared to those who draw the benefits, to be reasonably inexpensive and just. This assumption is at root a pro-life assumption! Indeed, we were a culture of life when such programs began. Only if we again foster a culture of life can we perpetuate the economic justice of taxing workers to pay health care for the poor. Without a growing population of youth, our growing population of retirees is outstripping our distribution systems. In a culture of death such as we have now, taxation to redistribute costs of medical care becomes both unjust and unsustainable.
Fourth, preventative care is a moral obligation of the individual to God and to his or her family and loved ones, not a right to be demanded from society. The gift of life comes only from God; to spurn that gift by seriously mistreating our own health is morally wrong. The most effective preventative care for most people is essentially free – good diet, moderate exercise, and sufficient sleep. But pre-natal and neo-natal care are examples of preventative care requiring medical expertise, and therefore cost; and this sort of care should be made available to all as far as possible.
Within these limits, the Church has been advocating for decades that health care be made more accessible to all, especially to the poor. Will the current health care reform proposals achieve these goals?
The current House reform bill, HR 3200, does not meet the first or the fourth standard. As Cardinal Justin Rigali has written for the USCCB Secretariat of Pro-life Activities, this bill circumvents the Hyde amendment (which prohibits federal funds from being used to pay for abortions) by drawing funding from new sources not covered by the Hyde amendment, and by creatively manipulating how federal funds covered by the Hyde amendment are accounted. It also provides a “public insurance option” without adequate limits, so that smaller employers especially will have a financial incentive to push all their employees into this public insurance. This will effectively prevent those employees from choosing any private insurance plans. This will saddle the working classes with additional taxes for inefficient and immoral entitlements. The Senate bill, HELP, is better than the House bill, as I understand it. It subsidizes care for the poor, rather than tending to monopolize care. But, it designates the limit of four times federal poverty level for the public insurance option, which still includes more than half of all workers. This would impinge on the vitality of the private sector. It also does not meet the first standard of explicitly excluding mandatory abortion coverage.
I encourage all of you to make you voice heard to our representatives in Congress. Tell them what they need to hear from us: no health care reform is better than the wrong sort of health care reform. Insist that they not permit themselves to be railroaded into the current too-costly and pro-abortion health care proposals. Insist on their support for proposals that respect the life and dignity of every human person, especially the unborn. And above all, pray for them, and for our country.
Most Reverend R. Walker Nickless
Bishop of Sioux City
Right-to-die teenager Hannah says 'I want to live'
Birmingham Post
Aug 18 2009 By Alison Dayani
A critically ill Herefordshire teenager who won the right to die changed her mind and is now “feeling brilliant” after a heart transplant.
Hannah Jones’ father Andrew revealed that the 14-year-old leaukaemia and cardiomyopathy patient changed her mind because she was “enjoying her life” and wanted more of it.
The teenager, from Marden, won the right to die peacefully at home after years of illness instead of having the life-saving transplant doctors wanted to give her in January.
But when her kidneys suddenly stopped working last month, Hannah did a U-turn and signed a consent form.
She is now recovering well from surgery at London’s Great Ormond Street Hospital.
Father-of-four Mr Jones, a 44-year-old auditor, said: “I’m obviously really happy with her decision, but me and her mother didn’t put any pressure on her.
“Hannah’s change of mind came because she has enjoyed her life so much over the past year that she wanted more of it.
“I’m over the moon that the transplant was a success but it was a major operation and she has someone else’s heart inside her, so she’s just trying to get used to that.”
The father said he had been by Hannah’s bedside with wife Kirsty, a 43-year-old former nurse, and their other children Oliver, 12, Lucy, 11, and Phoebe, five, since the operation three weeks ago.
Transplant surgeons took six and a half hours to implant the new heart and Hannah was left in intensive care for two weeks following the operation.
But the new heart could add a further 25 years to Hannah’s life.
When the teenager was struck with kidney failure, she was unable to receive dialysis as her heart was only beating on one side and too weak to cope with treatment, meaning the heart transplant was her only hope and she was placed on the transplant list.
Hannah said: “I’m tired but I feel brilliant compared to before.
“It seems really weird because I can feel the heart beating in my chest much stronger than before - and I know it’s different.
“I can also feel my pulse better and I can feel the blood being pumped up through my body into my neck.
“I’m still quite nervous but I’m really glad it’s all over.
“The thing I am most looking forward to is getting out of hospital and going home to be with my family. I also want to see my cat Tails McFluff because I’ve really missed him.
“My big dream is to go on holiday next summer and swim in the sea with my little sister Phoebe.”
Hannah underwent six operations in the past two years, which only kept her heart working at 10 per cent capacity, and the youngster was adamant that she could not face more surgery despite only having six months to live.
Hannah’s mother Mrs Jones said: “The last thing she said to me before the anaesthetic kicked in was ‘I love you mum’.
“When she woke up ten days later she couldn’t talk to start off with, but the first things she managed to say out loud was ‘drink’.
“The doctors have said her recovery is going brilliantly so far which is fantastic and it’s just a waiting game really.
“It will be fabulous to have all the family reunited back at home where we belong, I’m really looking forward to that.”
Aug 18 2009 By Alison Dayani
A critically ill Herefordshire teenager who won the right to die changed her mind and is now “feeling brilliant” after a heart transplant.
Hannah Jones’ father Andrew revealed that the 14-year-old leaukaemia and cardiomyopathy patient changed her mind because she was “enjoying her life” and wanted more of it.
The teenager, from Marden, won the right to die peacefully at home after years of illness instead of having the life-saving transplant doctors wanted to give her in January.
But when her kidneys suddenly stopped working last month, Hannah did a U-turn and signed a consent form.
She is now recovering well from surgery at London’s Great Ormond Street Hospital.
Father-of-four Mr Jones, a 44-year-old auditor, said: “I’m obviously really happy with her decision, but me and her mother didn’t put any pressure on her.
“Hannah’s change of mind came because she has enjoyed her life so much over the past year that she wanted more of it.
“I’m over the moon that the transplant was a success but it was a major operation and she has someone else’s heart inside her, so she’s just trying to get used to that.”
The father said he had been by Hannah’s bedside with wife Kirsty, a 43-year-old former nurse, and their other children Oliver, 12, Lucy, 11, and Phoebe, five, since the operation three weeks ago.
Transplant surgeons took six and a half hours to implant the new heart and Hannah was left in intensive care for two weeks following the operation.
But the new heart could add a further 25 years to Hannah’s life.
When the teenager was struck with kidney failure, she was unable to receive dialysis as her heart was only beating on one side and too weak to cope with treatment, meaning the heart transplant was her only hope and she was placed on the transplant list.
Hannah said: “I’m tired but I feel brilliant compared to before.
“It seems really weird because I can feel the heart beating in my chest much stronger than before - and I know it’s different.
“I can also feel my pulse better and I can feel the blood being pumped up through my body into my neck.
“I’m still quite nervous but I’m really glad it’s all over.
“The thing I am most looking forward to is getting out of hospital and going home to be with my family. I also want to see my cat Tails McFluff because I’ve really missed him.
“My big dream is to go on holiday next summer and swim in the sea with my little sister Phoebe.”
Hannah underwent six operations in the past two years, which only kept her heart working at 10 per cent capacity, and the youngster was adamant that she could not face more surgery despite only having six months to live.
Hannah’s mother Mrs Jones said: “The last thing she said to me before the anaesthetic kicked in was ‘I love you mum’.
“When she woke up ten days later she couldn’t talk to start off with, but the first things she managed to say out loud was ‘drink’.
“The doctors have said her recovery is going brilliantly so far which is fantastic and it’s just a waiting game really.
“It will be fabulous to have all the family reunited back at home where we belong, I’m really looking forward to that.”
Tens of thousands of Vietnamese Catholics rally for religious freedom on feast of the Assumption
Catholic World News (CWN)
Feature Stories
(Subscribe to RSS Feed)
Aug. 17, 2009 (CWNews.com) -
Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese Catholics in the Vinh diocese celebrated the feast of the Assumption on August 15 by marching in a rally with banners invoking the protection of the Virgin Mary and demanding the end to government persecutions. Meanwhile in Hanoi thousands of other Catholics organized their own protest against the conversion of property that was owned by the Church, and confiscated by the government, into a state park.
At the massive rally in Vinh, Bishop Paul Maria Cao Dinh Thuyen thanked his flock for their union and communion and their support for the quest for justice of the diocese. He expressed how excited and happy he was to see “half a million" people marching to show their support for the Church. Days earlier, police in three different provinces had been put on high alert in the wake of huge protests joined by an estimated 500,000 Catholics. Those demonstrations drew enormous crowds despite efforts by police to intimidate participants and to dissuade bus drivers from taking people to the rally. Thousands of local Catholics had spent Friday night walking for tens of kilometers to join in the demonstration. Tensions between the Church and government officials remained high in the Vinh diocese. Catholic businessment reported that mountains of trash had been dumped on their property. Police raided the home of one prominent parishioner, looking for a parish priest-- Father Peter Le Thanh Hong - who is wanted for "trampling on the laws of the country” and “inciting the faithful into the illegal constructing a house” on a site once owned by the Church. The diocese of Vinh has serious concerns about the priest's safety, because roving bands of thugs have been roaming the streets, calling for his death.
In a separated development, more than 3,000 Catholics in Hanoi gathered at a park that the local government had hastily built on the land once owned by a Redemptorist monastery. Catholic activists believe that the construction project was rushed forward to end their protest over the confiscation of the property; that protest had been going on for more than a year.
Public protests began in January, 2008, after Thai Ha parishioners discovered that local government officials had secretly sold the land to other private owners. The protests first took place outside a surrounding brick wall surrounding the land, built decades ago, on which protesters had hung icons and crosses, until the eve of the Feast of Our Lady of Assumption last year. After days of drenching rain, part of the wall collapsed on that day. Also give way, possibly causing injury to participants at the prayer vigils, parishioners removed several feet of the wall and moved the icons and statues to a more secure location. State media called the action a rebellious act that should be punished immediately and severely. Within days, dozens of parishioners were jailed and 8 of them were tried three months later in a criminal court.
The government bulldozed the wall and surrounding area shortly after the incident that gave rise to the charges, announcing that the area would now be converted into a public park.
Catholic activists announced that every year, as long as the land has not been returned to them, they will light up the park with a candlelight vigil on the feast of the Assumption to commemorate the historic event, and to remind their children and all people of conscience the injustice that they are still facing.
Feature Stories
(Subscribe to RSS Feed)
Aug. 17, 2009 (CWNews.com) -
Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese Catholics in the Vinh diocese celebrated the feast of the Assumption on August 15 by marching in a rally with banners invoking the protection of the Virgin Mary and demanding the end to government persecutions. Meanwhile in Hanoi thousands of other Catholics organized their own protest against the conversion of property that was owned by the Church, and confiscated by the government, into a state park.
At the massive rally in Vinh, Bishop Paul Maria Cao Dinh Thuyen thanked his flock for their union and communion and their support for the quest for justice of the diocese. He expressed how excited and happy he was to see “half a million" people marching to show their support for the Church. Days earlier, police in three different provinces had been put on high alert in the wake of huge protests joined by an estimated 500,000 Catholics. Those demonstrations drew enormous crowds despite efforts by police to intimidate participants and to dissuade bus drivers from taking people to the rally. Thousands of local Catholics had spent Friday night walking for tens of kilometers to join in the demonstration. Tensions between the Church and government officials remained high in the Vinh diocese. Catholic businessment reported that mountains of trash had been dumped on their property. Police raided the home of one prominent parishioner, looking for a parish priest-- Father Peter Le Thanh Hong - who is wanted for "trampling on the laws of the country” and “inciting the faithful into the illegal constructing a house” on a site once owned by the Church. The diocese of Vinh has serious concerns about the priest's safety, because roving bands of thugs have been roaming the streets, calling for his death.
In a separated development, more than 3,000 Catholics in Hanoi gathered at a park that the local government had hastily built on the land once owned by a Redemptorist monastery. Catholic activists believe that the construction project was rushed forward to end their protest over the confiscation of the property; that protest had been going on for more than a year.
Public protests began in January, 2008, after Thai Ha parishioners discovered that local government officials had secretly sold the land to other private owners. The protests first took place outside a surrounding brick wall surrounding the land, built decades ago, on which protesters had hung icons and crosses, until the eve of the Feast of Our Lady of Assumption last year. After days of drenching rain, part of the wall collapsed on that day. Also give way, possibly causing injury to participants at the prayer vigils, parishioners removed several feet of the wall and moved the icons and statues to a more secure location. State media called the action a rebellious act that should be punished immediately and severely. Within days, dozens of parishioners were jailed and 8 of them were tried three months later in a criminal court.
The government bulldozed the wall and surrounding area shortly after the incident that gave rise to the charges, announcing that the area would now be converted into a public park.
Catholic activists announced that every year, as long as the land has not been returned to them, they will light up the park with a candlelight vigil on the feast of the Assumption to commemorate the historic event, and to remind their children and all people of conscience the injustice that they are still facing.
Compounding Cowardice at Yale
Monday, August 17, 2009
[Candace de Russy]
First, the Yale University Press opted to pull the Danish cartoons of Muhammad and other illustrations of him included in Jytte Klausen's forthcoming book, The Cartoons that Shook the World.
Now, as Winfield Myers notes, Yale is refusing to identify the "authorities" behind whose skirts it hid to excuse the suppression of the cartoons:
[The] New York Times . . . said that . . . [Yale] "consulted two dozen authorities, including diplomats and experts on Islam and counterterrorism, and the recommendation was unanimous" that no illustrations should appear. . . .
Not only is Yale withholding the identity of the experts from the public; it refused to share them with Klausen herself. . . . Klausen was told she could read a summary of the experts' opinions "only if she signed a confidentiality agreement that forbade her from talking about them." She refused and called it a "gag order."
Inside Higher Ed subsequently published a statement by Yale in defense of its decisions. And a lame defense it is, as Myers rightly interprets it:
This statement smells of cowardice and compromise. We wanted to do the right thing, it claims, and publish the illustrations which, after all, are the subject of the book. But after we spoke to these experts (and you can't just ignore the advice of experts), we figured we'd skip out on our obligations to our author and readers and hide behind their advice, which we appreciate an awful lot.
[Candace de Russy]
First, the Yale University Press opted to pull the Danish cartoons of Muhammad and other illustrations of him included in Jytte Klausen's forthcoming book, The Cartoons that Shook the World.
Now, as Winfield Myers notes, Yale is refusing to identify the "authorities" behind whose skirts it hid to excuse the suppression of the cartoons:
[The] New York Times . . . said that . . . [Yale] "consulted two dozen authorities, including diplomats and experts on Islam and counterterrorism, and the recommendation was unanimous" that no illustrations should appear. . . .
Not only is Yale withholding the identity of the experts from the public; it refused to share them with Klausen herself. . . . Klausen was told she could read a summary of the experts' opinions "only if she signed a confidentiality agreement that forbade her from talking about them." She refused and called it a "gag order."
Inside Higher Ed subsequently published a statement by Yale in defense of its decisions. And a lame defense it is, as Myers rightly interprets it:
This statement smells of cowardice and compromise. We wanted to do the right thing, it claims, and publish the illustrations which, after all, are the subject of the book. But after we spoke to these experts (and you can't just ignore the advice of experts), we figured we'd skip out on our obligations to our author and readers and hide behind their advice, which we appreciate an awful lot.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Abortion and the Obama Health-Care Plan: the Essential Facts
by Phil Lawler. Catholic World News
(CWN)The following information-- which is not my own work, but the work of astute friends in Washington, DC-- provides all you need to know about the Obama White House plans regarding abortion and health-care reform:
From the latest polls:
* 51% of Americans self-identify as pro-life (Gallup Poll, June 2009)
* 61% of Americans say abortion is an important issue and 52% think it is too easy to obtain an abortion in America (Rasmussen Survey, June 2009)
* 62% of Americans want more limitations placed on abortions and only 36% believe abortion should be generally available (CBS Poll, June 2009).
Elections have consequences:
1) One of President Obama's funding requests, the Financial Services Appropriations bill, allows publicly funded abortion in the District of Columbia. This overturns a 13-year ban on taxpayer-funded abortions in the nation's capital. Amendments to restore the ban were either blocked or defeated by the majority. Currently, over 41% of pregnancies in DC end in abortion, giving the capital city the highest abortion rate in the nation.
2) Senator Durbin's amendment to the Financial Services Appropriations bill cleared the way for taxpayer-funded abortions through the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program, which covers 8 million federal employees. The FEHBP has been repeatedly discussed as an example of what a government-run health care system could be.
3) The House of Representatives voted against the Pence Amendment to the Labor/HHS/Education Appropriations bill. The amendment would have prevented Planned Parenthood or any business doing abortions from receiving taxpayer funds. Last year Planned Parenthood performed over 300,000 abortions. The Guttmacher Institute, the research arm of Planned Parenthood, reports that abortions increase by 30% when taxpayers foot the bill.
4) Through an amendment offered by Senator Lautenberg, the Senate has permanently reversed the Mexico City Policy, which banned taxpayer funds going to international agencies that perform or promote abortions. This gives the existing policy of funding international abortion services-- set by President Obama's Executive Order on January 23-- the force of law. Future presidents will be unable to re-establish the funding ban.
5) Following President Obama's instructions, Congress has completely defunded abstinence education and has designated a minimum of $164 million for contraceptive-only comprehensive sex education. In addition, the Secretary of HHS has a $640 million fund which can be used for family-planning services, if pro-Planned Parenthood Secretary of HHS Kathleen Sebelius so desires. A Zogby poll found that 80% of parents want more abstinence education. Studies prove that abstinence education is more effective in delaying the onset of sexual activity in young people than is comprehensive sex education. CSE has demonstrated no effect on teen behavior. (And do you find that surprising?)
6) President Obama is supporting the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which, through its affirmation of "sexual and reproductive health," recognizes an international right to abortion. He is urging the Senate to ratify the treaty, which sets up an international committee to decide whether the United States complies with the treaty's provisions. If ratified, the treaty would take precedence over all federal and state laws dealing with the disabled. The Vatican objects to the inclusion of the phrase "sexual and reproductive health" because it "may be used to deny the very basic right to life of disabled unborn persons." Like CEDAW (the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, which contains an international mandate for access to abortion services) and CRC (the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which interferes with parental rights over their children) which Obama also favors, this is a treaty that the United States should not ratify.
Heath-care reform:
1) The House version of the health care bill creates an "Advance Care Planning Consultation" for Medicare patients to be counseled on end-of-life decisions. Such consultations would take place every five years, or more frequently if there was a significant change in the individual's health. Two pro-life Congressmen state that "This provision could create a slippery slope for a more permissive environment for euthanasia, mercy-killing and physician-assisted suicide because it does not clearly exclude counseling about the supposed benefits of killing oneself."
2) Senator Mikulski (who identifies herself as a Catholic) offered an amendment to the Senate health-care bill that would provide for any service deemed "medically necessary or medically appropriate." When pressed by Senator Hatch, she admitted this would require the coverage of abortion services by health-insurance companies.
3) As currently written, both the Senate and House health care bills would allow federal officials to require the inclusion of abortion coverage in virtually all health plans, as well as taxpayer funding of abortions, and would expand the number of abortion providers in most parts of the country. Abortion services have been defined by legislatures and courts as being included in the term "essential health care." Because abortion would be "essential," it would be necessary to provide access to abortion, thereby mandating subsidizing the practice with taxpayer monies and increasing the number of abortionists and opening more abortion facilities in areas of the country that now do not have them. Catholic health-care professionals would be required to participate in abortions or run the risk of being charged with "patient abandonment," which could mean the loss of their license to practice.
4) The Capps Amendment to one of the health-care reform bills, presented as a compromise, is not: the government-run health plan offered in every region of the country will include whatever abortions are eligible for public funding and will include all abortions if so approved by the HHS Secretary.
5) A provision of the health-care bills establishes the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality which would do comparative effectiveness research-- that is, it would determine the most cost-effective treatment for a specific medical condition and would override the doctor's decision for his patient. A government bureaucracy dictating health care decisions has, in England, led to rationing of health care, selection of inappropriate or ineffective treatments for individual patients and premature deaths. When a pro-life Senator offered an amendment in committee to prevent rationing of health care services for the old, the infirm and the chronically ill, it was voted down by the majority. President Obama said recently that "the chronically ill and those toward the end of their lives are accounting for 80% of the total health care bill."
6) The health-care bills call for a new health-benefits advisory committee whose task it will be to define benefits for all health plans in the United States. As it will be an unelected committee named by the Secretary of HHS, there will be no accountability to the citizenry for what the committee determines will be the necessary components of health coverage.
7) Under the current health-care reform bills, there is no conscience clause allowing an individual or an organization with a religious affiliation to opt out of health plans that include an abortion component. The Senate bill contains a very weak conscience clause for those religions that, as a tenet of their faith, do not seek medical care (they would not be required to carry insurance coverage). Catholic institutions and organizations with Catholic affiliations would be forced to offer abortion coverage in their employee health insurance package.
8) The Senate health care bill contains a hidden provision that matches the provisions of the Freedom of Choice Act; it would preempt any state law hindering a woman's access to "essential health services"-- again, a phrase that includes abortion services. Federal health care legislation would overturn the following state laws:
* 42 states have physician-only laws that limit the practice of abortion;
* 32 states follow the funding limitations of the federal Hyde Amendment (no taxpayer funding of abortions);
* 27 states have abortion clinic regulations to protect the health of women;
* 30 states have informed-consent laws (women receive information about fetal development, fetal pain or the causal link between abortion and breast cancer; or are offered an ultrasound exam);
* 24 states require a 24-hour waiting period before an abortion;
* 36 states require some kind of parental involvement: either parental notice (11 states) or parental consent (25 states);
* at least 5 states have funded abortion alternatives (pregnancy centers, prenatal assistance, adoption promotion).
9) The Hyde Amendment cannot take care of the abortion issue in the various health care bills. Abortion must be explicitly excluded from coverage. Access to abortion also must be explicitly excluded or taxpayer funds will be used to fund abortions and the expansion of abortion services and facilities. This means there must be language in the actual legislation that excludes abortion in "medically necessary or medically appropriate" and "essential" health care.
10) The health-care system in the United States accounts for 14% of our economy. (It equals the size of Great Britain's entire economy.) Any plan to revamp that large a piece of any economy requires thoughtful decision-making, not a rush-to-completion with a majority of the Congress not even reading the legislation. Congressman Conyers said: "What good is reading the bill if it's a thousand pages and you don't have two days and two lawyers to find out what it means after you've read the bill?" It should be noted that lawyers make up 54% of the Senate and 36% of the House of Representatives.
Wayne State U. Reaches Settlement With Pro-Life student Group
Christian Law Journal-
Posted by editorial staff on Aug 14th, 2009 and filed under Religious Freedom. You can follow any responses to this story through the RSS 2.0. Share your thoughts and leave a comment. 
Joseph Martins serves as litigation staff counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund Center for Academic Freedom at its Tennessee Regional Service Center in Columbia, Tennessee.
Wayne State University has settled a lawsuit filed by the campus pro-life student group which said the university discriminated against them.
Wayne State University (WSU) who lists “integrity” as one of its principls on the schools seal, has agreed to change its unconstitutional student fee and facilities use policies and pay back previously denied student fee funds.
Last year WSU, located in Michigan, refused to allow the Students for Life group have the same access to student fees and facilities as other student groups.
Andrea Bezaire, president of Students for Life at WSU, submitted a budget request to the schools Budget Committee to help fund the group’s Pro-Life Week 2008 events.
The committee denied the request because of the “spiritual and religious programming references” and added that the group’s message “cross[ed] the line of political advocacy.”
In response, Bezaire’s removed all religious references in order to meet the budget committee’s demands and resubmitted the request.
The university replied by denying the group’s entire budget request, with some student council members stating that the subject matter of the group’s events was inappropriate and offensive to women who had an abortion.
The Students for Life claimed foul and contacted attorneys with the Alliance Defence Fund (ADF).
ADF attorneys filed a lawsuit against university officials, challenging the constitutionality of the univesity’s policy, which excludes student groups with religious views from benefits that are extended to student groups with nonreligious views.
“Pro-life student groups shouldn’t be penalized for expressing their beliefs,” said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Joseph Martins. “Public universities cannot discriminate against student organizations simply because of their religious or political viewpoints, and we are pleased that Wayne State has now come to this understanding.”
Also revised as part of the settlement was WSU’s reservation policy, which denied Students for Life access to a room because the university officials declared the group’s pro-life event “unsuitable.” The lawsuit, Wayne State University Students for Life v. Driker, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan
Wayne State University (WSU) who lists “integrity” as one of its principls on the schools seal, has agreed to change its unconstitutional student fee and facilities use policies and pay back previously denied student fee funds.
Last year WSU, located in Michigan, refused to allow the Students for Life group have the same access to student fees and facilities as other student groups.
Andrea Bezaire, president of Students for Life at WSU, submitted a budget request to the schools Budget Committee to help fund the group’s Pro-Life Week 2008 events.
The committee denied the request because of the “spiritual and religious programming references” and added that the group’s message “cross[ed] the line of political advocacy.”
In response, Bezaire’s removed all religious references in order to meet the budget committee’s demands and resubmitted the request.
The university replied by denying the group’s entire budget request, with some Student Council members stating that the subject matter of the group’s events was inappropriate and offensive to women who had an abortion.
Interestingly, the Student Council claims on its website that it is a “non-discriminatory non-partisan representative body of students.”
The Students for Life claimed foul and contacted attorneys with the Alliance Defence Fund (ADF).
ADF attorneys filed a lawsuit against university officials, challenging the constitutionality of the university’s policy, which excludes student groups with religious views from benefits that are extended to student groups with nonreligious views.
“Pro-life student groups shouldn’t be penalized for expressing their beliefs,” said ADF Litigation Staff Counsel Joseph Martins. “Public universities cannot discriminate against student organizations simply because of their religious or political viewpoints, and we are pleased that Wayne State has now come to this understanding.”
Also revised as part of the settlement was WSU’s reservation policy, which denied Students for Life access to a room because the university officials declared the group’s pro-life event “unsuitable.”
Complaint: Wayne State University Students for Life v. Driker, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of MichiganMonday, August 10, 2009
Boy Released from Al Qaeda
FALLUJA, Iraq (CNN) -- Like many young boys, Khidir loves playing with toy cars and wants to be a policeman like his father when he grows up. But it was his father's very job that caused the tiny child to suffer the unimaginable.
Khidir, now 8, was kidnapped and held hostage for two years by operatives with al Qaeda in Iraq.
1 of 2
Khidir was just 6 years old when he was savagely ripped away from his family, kidnapped by al Qaeda operatives in Iraq.
"They beat me with a shovel, they pulled my teeth out with pliers, they would go like this and pull it," said Khidir, now 8, demonstrating with his hands. "And they would make me work on the farm gathering carrots."
What followed was even more horrific, an ordeal that would last for two years in captivity. Khidir and his father spoke to CNN recently, more than half a year after his rescue by Iraqi police. 
"This is where they hammered a nail into my leg and then they pulled it out," he says, lifting up his pant leg to show a tiny wound.
He says his captors also pulled out each of his tiny fingernails, broke both his arms, and beat him repeatedly on the side of the head with a shovel. He still suffers chronic headaches. He remembers them laughing as they inflicted the pain.
"I would think about my mommy and daddy," he replies, when asked how he managed to get through the agony.
His father, Abdul Qader, struggles for words. "When he tells me about how they would torture him, I can't tolerate it. I start crying," he says. "What hurts me the most is when they hammered a nail into his leg."
The father, a police officer, was sleeping at the police station in Falluja when his son was kidnapped. It was too dangerous to go home regularly. Although Falluja was no longer controlled by insurgents, assassinations against police were common.
"I woke up to the sound of a huge explosion ... and then I heard my name on the radio. I ran outside and they came to me saying your house was blown up," he says.
"When the police patrol came back, they all started kissing and comforting me," he continues. "I was asking, 'What's going on? Where is my family?' They told me that they took my son. This was a disaster. I went mad that day, I wasn't normal, I was hysterical."
Khidir's grandmother was at home with the family at the time.
"The kidnappers climbed the fence and kicked in the door," she says."They were screaming for Abdul Qader. I told them he's not here. They called me a liar and said we want his son. His son was hiding behind me, clutching my clothes. I said this is not his son. They hit me on the back with a rifle and ripped him out of my arms."
The last thing she remembers were his screams of "Granny, Granny!"
The attackers rigged the house with explosives and demolished it before taking off with the 6-year-old. The boy's grandmother and seven other family members rushed out of the home before it exploded.
"The kidnappers called me on the phone and demanded that some prisoners that we had be released or they would slit his throat," Khidir's father says. "But I said no to the release. I would not put killers back out on the street that would hurt other Muslims. So I thought to myself, 'Let my son be a martyr.' "
He even held a secret funeral for his little boy. He didn't want to tell the rest of the family that he had refused the kidnappers' ultimatum, allowing them to hope that he was still alive.
Last December, nearly two years later, police in Taji, about 45 miles (70 kilometers) away, received a tip that terrorists were holding kidnapped children.
"We thought that it was just a tip to ambush us, but we considered the mission as a sacrifice," said Iraqi police Capt. Khalib Ali. "Either we find the children and free them or face the danger and take the risk."
The tip led the Iraqi police to a rundown farm and a series of mud huts. Khidir's tiny body was twisted abnormally. And in another hut, they found another child. Two children are still believed to be with the kidnappers.
Al Qaeda in Iraq has historically kidnapped children for money, to pressure officials, and even to use in terrorist attacks.
For Khidir's father, it was as if his son had come back from the dead.
"He didn't recognize his mother or his grandmother," Abdul Qader says. "But then he saw me in uniform and ran to me. I went flying toward him to hug him. People said be careful; both his arms are broken. So I held him from his waist, and he hugged me, kissed me, smelled me, and then broke into a smile."
The father flips through old family photos -- all they were able to salvage from their destroyed home -- and notes some of the kidnappers are still at large. He still fears for his son's safety, but says he won't quit the police force.
"Never, never," he says. "If I leave the police force, if others leave the force, who will protect us from the terrorists? We are the only ones.Chuck Comment- If we do not stop these animals, no one will.
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
3rd Circuit Upholds 10-Year Internet Ban in Child Porn Case
Shannon P. Duffy
08-04-2009
http://www.law.com/
08-04-2009
http://www.law.com/
A man who was indicted as the leader of a child pornography ring in Delaware has lost an appeal that challenged both his 20-year prison term and a ban on using the Internet for another decade after he is released.
Paul Thielemann, 26, pleaded guilty to one count of receiving child pornography and claimed in the appeal that his punishment was premised on conduct for which he was never formally charged -- encouraging others to commit acts of child molestation.
The appellate panel flatly rejected Thielemann's challenge to the length of his prison term, concluding that it was within the range suggested by the sentencing guidelines and not out of line with the sentences imposed on other leading members of the ring.
But the decision in United States v. Thielemann is legally significant because it helps define a still emerging area of the law that trial judges have found perplexing: how far judges can go in crafting the "conditions of release" that restrict a criminal defendant's behavior in the period just after a prison term.
In prior decisions, the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has overturned some restrictions as too harsh, such as a lifetime ban on using computers or barring a defendant from possessing all forms of pornography, including legal adult pornography.
But in the case of Thielemann, the 3rd Circuit concluded that the conduct was far worse and justified the harsh restrictions imposed by U.S. District Judge Sue Robinson because the evidence showed that Thielemann not only traded child pornography with nine other men, but also encouraged some of the men to engage in acts of child molestation and to share images of those acts on Web cams.
Senior U.S. Circuit Judge Leonard I. Garth concluded that Robinson hadn't violated Thielemann's First Amendment rights when she barred him from possessing any "sexually explicit" materials.
"We hold that there is a significant nexus between restricting Thielemann from access to adult 'sexually explicit' material and the goals of supervised release, and that the restriction here is not overbroad or vague considering the content of the instant record," Garth wrote in an opinion joined by 3rd Circuit Judge Marjorie O. Rendell and visiting U.S. District Judge Thomas I. Vanaskie of the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
Garth also found that Robinson had properly tailored a restriction that bans Thielemann from accessing the Internet for 10 years after his release unless he gets permission from his probation officer.
"Thielemann can own or use a personal computer as long as it is not connected to the Internet; thus he is allowed to use word processing programs and other benign software," Garth wrote.
Garth found there were sharp contrasts between Thielemann's case and that of Daniel Voelker, whose lawyers successfully argued in June 2007 that the trial judge had gone too far in imposing a lifetime ban on using computers.
According to court papers, Voelker was nabbed during an FBI investigation of another man, Wyndell Williams, when agents were monitoring a computer "chat" between Williams and Voelker.
During the online chat, Voelker briefly exposed the buttocks of his 3-year-old daughter over a webcam that was connected to his computer, and, when confronted by the FBI, admitted to downloading child pornography and to exposing his daughter. But Voelker insisted that statements he had made in the chat about sexual contact with minors or offering his daughter for sex were merely gratuitous statements in the nature of "role-playing."
Voelker pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 71 months in prison, but argued on appeal that the lifetime ban on using computers was too harsh.
In overturning the restriction, 3rd Circuit Judge Theodore A. McKee wrote: "Although Voelker's conduct was reprehensible, he did not use his computer equipment to seek out minors nor did he attempt to set up any meetings with minors over the Internet."
McKee found that the trial judge failed to tailor the restriction because "computers and Internet access have become virtually indispensable in the modern world" and a "lifetime ban on all computer equipment and the Internet is the functional equivalent of prohibiting a defendant who pleads guilty to possession of magazines containing child pornography from ever possessing any books or magazines of any type during the remainder of his/her life."
But in Thielemann's case, Garth found that the restrictions were less harsh because the ban lasts 10 years as compared to a lifetime ban, and that Robinson was justified by Thielemann's conduct, which went beyond mere possession of pornographic images.
"The parameters of the computer restriction in this case are far less troubling than those in Voelker," Garth wrote.
"Moreover, the restriction is not disproportionate when viewed in the context of Thielemann's conduct," Garth wrote. "Thielemann did more than simply trade child pornography; he utilized Internet communication technologies to facilitate, entice, and encourage the real-time molestation of a child."
As a result, Garth said, "the restriction on computer and Internet use therefore shares a nexus to the goals of deterrence and protection of the public, and does not involve a greater deprivation of liberty than is necessary in this case."
Thielemann was represented in the appeal by attorney Larrick B. Stapleton of Ardmore, Pa.
Assistant U.S. Attorney Edmond Falgowski argued the appeal for the government.
Chuck comment- The judge reasoned that depriving access to computers is equivalent to eliminating all access to books and magazines in perpetuity. I wonder how much time the Third Circuit spends in the Library or Barnes and Noble? Just like a driver's license, a computer and access to it is a privilege, not a right. Just like a drunk driver with a car, a child abuser with a computer can irreparably harm a child or post nude pictures of them online. Once that happens no one can ever retrieve them. For the rest of the child's life, they will know that pictures of themselves are floating out there somewhere and they will have to live with that burden.
Sunday, August 2, 2009
Obama appoints Moslem endorsed by radical group as Asst. Sec. of Dept. Homeland Security!!
Sunday, June 07, 2009
OBAMA APPOINTMENT: Arif Alikhan, Asst Secretary DHS
By : Pam Geller- Atlas Shrugs
Arif Alikhan, currently deputy mayor for the city of Los Angeles, was appointed as assistant secretary for the Office of Policy Development at the Department of Homeland Security.
Muslim Democrats welcome Alikhan’s appointment
At a banquet/fundraiser for the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California last weekend, the first speaker was Arif Alikhan (Deputy Mayor of Los Angeles - in charge of public safety for the city). He bid farewell, as he is going to take a post as Assistant Secretary at the Department of Homeland Security. Arif Alikhan is a devout Sunni and the son of Pakistani immigrants (here).
....speakers included Arif Ali Khan, the former Deputy Mayor of Los Angeles. He bid the attendees farewell as he prepared to leave the Los Angeles area for Washington, D. C. There he will serve as Assistant Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
Professor Agha Saeed of the American Muslim Task Force (AMT) spoke of the aftermath of 9/11 and the struggle of the Muslim Community against the pervasive atmosphere of Islamophobia and hatred. It was a struggle against the tide - a very strong tide - to prevent Muslims in America from being marginalized and silenced.
Professor Saeed ....issued five demands from Muslims to the Department of Justice. These demands included a cessation to the infiltration by spies of mosques and an end to the introduction of agents provocateur. In addition there was to be a cessation of attempts to undermine Muslim groups such as the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR).
This is where Alikhan spoke? He was comfortable with this terror talk?
Why Alikhan? DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano noted Alikhan’s “broad and impressive array of experience in national security, emergency preparedness and counterterrorism.” I am not sure what she is talking about (neither is she, I am sure.)
Arif Alikhan was appointed Deputy Mayor of LA - picked from relative obscurity.
He began his career seven years ago, when he took a job with the Department of Justice hunting down computer hackers, crooks who were selling merchandise on Ebay at rock-bottom prices. In his former position as an assistant US attorney, Alikhan consistently did his work accurately and silently, never producing any headlines. But then he suddenly became one of the most important men in Los Angeles, America's second-largest city after New York.
He took the position of Deputy Mayor in November 2006. The year that the Congress went Democrat and history and America took a disastrous turn. How does an obscure bureaucrat a and devout Muslim come to the position of Deputy Mayor of Los Angeles - in charge of public safety for the city? And now Assistant Secretary to DHS?
Un-indicted co-conspirator CAIR was thrilled at the appointment:
CAIR-LA Congratulates Calif. Muslim Appointed to DHS Post , Arif Alikhan will serve as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development
(LOS ANGELES, CA., 5/6/09) - The Greater Los Angeles Area chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR-LA) today congratulated Arif Alikhan on his recent appointment as Assistant Secretary for Policy Development in the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
"Congratulations to Mr. Ali Khan on this well-deserved appointment," said CAIR-LA Executive Director Hussam Ayloush. "Mr. Alikhan's new position reflects his and the community's dedication to helping preserve the security of our country. The American Muslim community can be proud of him."
In the past few weeks, American Muslim leaders have been urging the Obama administration to be inclusive and to reflect the diversity of our nation as he selects the most qualified public servants to fill important positions.
"Congratulations to Mr. Ali Khan on this well-deserved appointment," said CAIR-LA Executive Director Hussam Ayloush. "Mr. Alikhan's new position reflects his and the community's dedication to helping preserve the security of our country. The American Muslim community can be proud of him."
In the past few weeks, American Muslim leaders have been urging the Obama administration to be inclusive and to reflect the diversity of our nation as he selects the most qualified public servants to fill important positions.
Back in 2007, Alikhan was instrumental in removing the Muslim terror tracking plan in LA.
The controversial Muslim 'Mapping' Plan of the Los Angeles Police Department is now "dead on arrival" according to Chief William Bratton.
"It is over and not just put on the side," said Chief Bratton in a meeting with the Muslim leadership of Southern California on Thursday, November 15th. The meeting was moderated by Deputy Mayor of Los Angeles, Arif Alikhan and attended by Deputy Chief Mike Downing.
Chief Bratton acknowledged the hurt and offense caused to Muslims and agreed to send a letter to the Muslim community announcing the official termination of the 'mapping' plan.
A major reason for the termination of the 'mapping' plan was the Muslim community's vociferous opposition and active civic engagement in making themselves heard beyond Los Angeles. Muslim organizations demonstrated a strong unity of purpose and message on the issue of 'mapping' that led to a position of strength for Muslims in the meeting. Those involved in the initial phases of this controversy were the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Muslim Public Affairs Council, and Muslim Advocates.
Saturday, August 1, 2009
6 killed in Pakistan as Muslims burn Christian homes
Fighting broke out as Muslims torched 40 to 50 houses in Christian enclave. Muslims enraged over an alleged desecration of Quran at a Christian wedding.
- Muslims burned 15 Christian homes on Thursday
- Pakistan predominantly Muslim, but has a small Christian community
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) -- Six people were killed in Pakistan on Saturday when Muslim demonstrators set fire to houses in a Christian enclave and fighting broke out, local police said.
Police said Muslims were enraged over an alleged desecration of pages in the Quran at a Christian wedding last Saturday, and held a rally to protest. The Quran is the Muslim sacred text.
The Muslims went to the Christian community in Gojra City, 160 kilometers (100 miles) southwest of Lahore, and burned 40 to 50 houses. Muslims and Christians exchanged gunfire.
Police said efforts to settle the concerns with dialogue so far have failed.
On Thursday, 15 Christian houses in the region were also torched.
Pakistan is predominantly Muslim but has a small Christian community.
Meanwhile, police in Islamabad reported Friday that an al Qaeda member thought to be involved in several attacks was arrested.
Bin Yamin, a senior police official in Islamabad, identified the suspect as Rao Shakir Ali.
Police believe he was involved in strikes on targets such as the Danish Embassy, a rally of Chief Justice Iftikhar Chauhdary, police, and a hotel.
The suspect is a resident of Sargodha, which is 165 kilometers (about 100 miles) northwest of Lahore and has a house in Rawalpindi that has been used to facilitate insurgent acts, police said.
Journalist Nasir Habib contributed to this report.
Chuck Comment- While no one should deface the sacred text of another religion, the reaction is way over the top. The response seems both disproportionate and typical treatment accorded to Christians accused of wrong doings while the same behavior would be protected speech in this country were a Moslem to burn the bible.
I encourage everyone to visit the Voice of the Martyrs Website-
http://www.persecution.com/
Poland marks 1944 revolt against Nazis
Sirens wailed across the Polish capital Saturday as elderly veterans and thousands of ordinary people held emotional commemorations of an ill-fated World War II revolt against the Nazi German occupiers. 
At 5:00 pm (1500 GMT) -- the exact time the Warsaw uprising was launched on August 1, 1944 -- traffic drew to a halt and pedestrians stopped to observe a minute's silence.
A huge crowd also flocked to Warsaw's main military cemetery to lay flowers on the graves of those who died in the 63 days of bitter street fighting, which sparked brutal Nazi reprisals.
"We live in a completely different time. The war is long gone. But when I think about those times and what they did, I'm really proud," said Tobiasz Berger, 18.
The number of veterans has dwindled to 3,500, and the elderly fighters gather without fail every year to honour the fallen.
"I was at my daughter's place in California and came back specially for the commemorations," said Halina Cichowska-Komarnicka, 85, a resistance messenger and nurse.
The 1944 uprising was led by the Home Army -- commanded by Poland's London-based government-in-exile -- which secretly deployed around 50,000 fighters in Warsaw.
It was part of a series of Polish revolts behind German lines as a Soviet offensive drove back the Nazis.
Against overwhelming odds, the poorly-armed Home Army began preparing as early as 1940. It hoped to take the entire city in 1944 but could only seize pockets.
Around 18,000 Polish fighters died in the revolt, and some 17,000 Nazi troops. Around 200,000 civilians were massacred, or killed by crossfire and bombing, as the Nazis took Warsaw back street by street.
The Home Army capitulated on October 2 when Germany agreed to treat its members as prisoners of war rather than execute them as "bandits".
The Nazis expelled Warsaw's remaining 500,000 inhabitants and razed the city.
The uprising remains etched in veterans' minds.
"On the third day, that's when the euphoria set in. We saw the Polish flag flying," said Julian Kulski, 80, who joined the Home Army aged 13.
Kulski had lost several relatives and close friends to the Nazis.
"At that time I just wanted revenge. I was full of hate. What I saw was so inhuman. They considered us as 'non-humans', but they were the non-humans," he said.
"When I hear German today, I get goosebumps," said Kulski, who now lives in the United States.
The Nazis had imposed a reign of terror in Poland after invading in 1939. In Warsaw, they crammed hundreds of thousands of Jews into a ghetto, sent them to death camps, and destroyed a swathe of the city during a revolt by hundreds of Jewish fighters in April 1943.
The uprising also aimed to thwart the creation of a pro-Soviet government.
In 1939, the Nazis and Soviets had cut a deal to carve up Poland.
Their pact broke down in 1941 when Germany invaded the Soviet Union. As the Red Army rolled back the Nazis, it installed communist governments across Eastern Europe.
The Soviets halted their offensive on the outskirts of Warsaw, east of the Vistula river -- whether deliberately or because of battle-fatigue remains a subject of heated debate.
Britain and the United States tried to help, but Moscow barred their supply planes from landing behind Soviet lines, forcing them into perilous roundtrips from liberated Italy.
Soviet troops moved into Warsaw on January 17, 1945. Under the communist regime, Home Army veterans were executed and jailed, or fled into exile.
The uprising became iconic for banned post-war opposition movements such as Solidarity, formed in the 1980s.
"The spirit and moral strength of the uprising later motivated Solidarity. In this sense the uprising achieved its final goal," said Marcin Swiecicki, 54, a former mayor of Warsaw.
Official ceremonies have only been held since communism's demise in 1989, and have grown every year since then.
Chuck Comment- May G-d Bless them, and may those who
fell since and during the uprising and those who continue
to give their lives and freedom opposing the tyrannical,
rest in paradise and the peace that passes understanding.
Obama's revealing body language (updated and expanded))
July 31, 2009
This picture truly is worth at least a thousand words.
Hat tip: Rick Richman
Update from Thomas Lifson:
This picture truly is worth at least a thousand words.
I am stunned that the official White House Blog published this picture and that it is in the public domain. The body language is most revealing.
Sergeant Crowley, the sole class act in this trio, helps the handicapped Professor Gates down the stairs, while Barack Obama
, heedless of the infirmities of his friend and fellow victim of self-defined racial profiling, strides ahead on his own. So who is compassionate? And who is so self-involved and arrogant that he is oblivious?
In my own dealings with the wealthy and powerful, I have always found that the way to quickly capture the moral essence of a person is to watch how they treat those who are less powerful. Do they understand that the others are also human beings with feelings? Especially when they think nobody is looking.
Hat tip: Rick Richman
Update from Thomas Lifson:
I think this photo constitutes another major Obama blunder.
As some AT commentators point out, this picture becomes a metaphor for ObamaCare. The elderly are left in the back, with only the kindness of the Crowleys of the world, the stand up guys, to depend on. The government has other priorities.
One of the major subtexts of the health care debate involves the public's fear of indifferent, powerful bureaucrats ruling their lives. It is one thing to wait in line at the DMV to find out which other line you should wait in, in order to begin the process of waiting for multiple bureaucrats to go through the motions of processing your request. I have spent entire afternoons going through this process.
But when we get to health care, waiting often means enduring pain and dysfunction longer than necessary, sometimes a worsening of the condition, and sometimes death.
That's why I think this image will have genuine resonance. It captures something that older Americans in particular can relate to. The President presses ahead with a program that will tell them to take painkillers instead of getting that artificial hip.
At every stage of the entire Gates affair, Obama has provided a revealing tell. The "acted stupidly" blunder revealed that he automatically blames the police and thinks they really are stupid to begin with. It didn't trigger a single alarm bell in his mind as he figured out what to say.
Then, the non-apology apology revealed an arrogant man who cannot do what honest people do: admit it when they make a mistake.
Now at stage three, the beer photo op looked OK. It didn't turn into a disaster.
But then in a small moment that nobody in the White House had the brains to understand, Obama goes and send a body language message like this.
I think he is going to get deeper and deeper into trouble. He is no longer repeating the familiar scripts dreamed up for the campaign. He was a master performer.
But when he goes improv, as a president must do, he lets his true character show. This helps widen the level of doubt that Obama is the same guy a majority voted for. Those doubts can only grow.
Friday, July 31, 2009
How Each Household Gets Obamatized in 2009 (click to enlarge)
Graphic by Chuck Saunders based on Heritage Foundation Data
The pie chart represents the amount of money spent in the national budget as attributed to each household.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
