By RON CSILLAG
Religion News Service
TORONTO – A majority-Muslim public school in Toronto is defending its policy of allowing an imam to lead Friday prayers in the cafeteria, saying students who leave school for prayers at a mosque typically don’t return to school.
Christian and other prayers are disallowed in the public school system.
For the past three years, some 300 Muslim students at Valley Park Middle School have been allowed to use the school cafeteria for their Friday prayers. Before the policy change, school officials say students would leave classes early and not return.
“I think it’s important to note the prayer isn’t conducted under the auspices of the board,” Jim Spyropoulos, a superintendent for inclusive schools with the Toronto District School Board, told the Globe and Mail newspaper. “This was the best solution that avoided compromising instructional time.”
The issue is “about religious accommodation,” Shari Schwartz-Maltz, a school district spokeswoman, told The Canadian Press.
Those explanations have not placated angry parents, who are lighting up radio call-in shows and blogging furiously — particularly since Christian and other prayers are disallowed in the public school system.
In an unlikely alliance, Canadian Hindu Advocacy, the Jewish Defense League and the Muslim Canadian Congress have voiced strong opposition to the arrangement.
Islamic groups are “imposing their view” to “spread their ideology,” Ron Banerjee, director of Canadian Hindu Advocacy, told the Globe and Mail.
The Muslim Canadian Congress has asked for the services to be halted or closely monitored to avert the spread of radicalism.
The board noted that there have been no complaints about the arrangement until it was highlighted recently by by a right-wing blogger.
Monday, July 18, 2011
Thursday, July 14, 2011
BURKE: Political correctness gone mad at Ground Zero
We can have a Ground Zero Mosque, but not a memorial that actually memorializes 9/11
Illustration: WTC sphereThis Sept. 11, the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks upon America, New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg will dedicate the massive, $600 million National September 11 Memorial and Museum at the World Trade Center. What Americans have not been told is that this “memorial” will remake Ground Zero so that it does not acknowledge 9/11.
Instead of acting as a constant reminder of the attacks, a symbol for us and future generations of the evil that struck, the death and destruction it caused and the heroism and sacrifice in response, the memorial will wipe out all evidence and memory of the attacks.
Replacing all reminders of the attacks will be two immense “voids” with gigantic subterranean waterfalls designed to express exclusively, as per architect Michael Arad, the continuing “absence in our lives caused by these deaths.”
About 500 trees will be planted upon the site. They are, we are told by memorial officials, “traditional symbols of the rejuvenation of life.” They also will eradicate all trace and memory of what stood there for 30 years and its destruction on Sept. 11.
The cause of “these deaths,” how these people came to be absent - that is, 9/11 - has been deemed irrelevant and even contrary to your memorial “experience.”
The memorial is not about that; it’s about you.
Cities and towns across America have humbly requested a segment of the twisted steel of the WTC to feature in their own modest Sept. 11 memorials. The only memorial where one is not welcome is the “national” memorial at Ground Zero. Those iconic remnants, exactly because they are iconic, are considered far too gauche for the jury of intellectuals and artists who chose the design.
The National September 11 Memorial at the WTC will not include the iconic WTC “Sphere” - again, exactly because it is iconic. “The Sphere” stood in the center of the WTC plaza for 30 years as a symbol of world peace. On 9/11, though badly damaged (a piece of one of the planes tore through it) it survived the attacks in place and was embraced by many Americans as a symbol of the nation’s strength and resiliency.
That is why it cannot be returned.
It sits at Battery Park, about a half-mile from Ground Zero, where it was installed March 11, 2002, the six-month anniversary of the attacks, as a “temporary” memorial. Battery Park is undergoing its own renovations, and “The Sphere” will have to moved.
One 9/11 anniversary at Ground Zero, Mr. Arad told me that returning “The Sphere” would be “didactic.” That is, it would tell us what to think.
Somehow disposing of it is not telling us what to think.
This is like banishing the USS Arizona from the USS Arizona Memorial.
The 9/11 memorial will not identify Christine Lee Hanson, who died with her parents when United Airlines Flight 175 was slammed into the South Tower, as being “age 2.” This might convince you that the American victims were “innocent” and the foreign terrorists “guilty.”
That would be telling us what to think.
Story Continues →
Instead of acting as a constant reminder of the attacks, a symbol for us and future generations of the evil that struck, the death and destruction it caused and the heroism and sacrifice in response, the memorial will wipe out all evidence and memory of the attacks.
Replacing all reminders of the attacks will be two immense “voids” with gigantic subterranean waterfalls designed to express exclusively, as per architect Michael Arad, the continuing “absence in our lives caused by these deaths.”
About 500 trees will be planted upon the site. They are, we are told by memorial officials, “traditional symbols of the rejuvenation of life.” They also will eradicate all trace and memory of what stood there for 30 years and its destruction on Sept. 11.
The cause of “these deaths,” how these people came to be absent - that is, 9/11 - has been deemed irrelevant and even contrary to your memorial “experience.”
The memorial is not about that; it’s about you.
Cities and towns across America have humbly requested a segment of the twisted steel of the WTC to feature in their own modest Sept. 11 memorials. The only memorial where one is not welcome is the “national” memorial at Ground Zero. Those iconic remnants, exactly because they are iconic, are considered far too gauche for the jury of intellectuals and artists who chose the design.
The National September 11 Memorial at the WTC will not include the iconic WTC “Sphere” - again, exactly because it is iconic. “The Sphere” stood in the center of the WTC plaza for 30 years as a symbol of world peace. On 9/11, though badly damaged (a piece of one of the planes tore through it) it survived the attacks in place and was embraced by many Americans as a symbol of the nation’s strength and resiliency.
That is why it cannot be returned.
It sits at Battery Park, about a half-mile from Ground Zero, where it was installed March 11, 2002, the six-month anniversary of the attacks, as a “temporary” memorial. Battery Park is undergoing its own renovations, and “The Sphere” will have to moved.
One 9/11 anniversary at Ground Zero, Mr. Arad told me that returning “The Sphere” would be “didactic.” That is, it would tell us what to think.
Somehow disposing of it is not telling us what to think.
This is like banishing the USS Arizona from the USS Arizona Memorial.
The 9/11 memorial will not identify Christine Lee Hanson, who died with her parents when United Airlines Flight 175 was slammed into the South Tower, as being “age 2.” This might convince you that the American victims were “innocent” and the foreign terrorists “guilty.”
That would be telling us what to think.
Story Continues →
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Brave Muslim Betrayed by Obama Takes Rap for Bin Laden Kill
By Debbie Schlussel
Shakil Afridi is the rare pro-American Muslim who risked his life for America and might lose his life for it. Today, this medical doctor who helped the U.S. confirm that Osama Bin Laden was the guy living in that crappy Paki mansion . . . well, he sits in a Pakistani prison awaiting his fate, after he was arrest by the pro-Bin Laden ISI. He committed the ultimate crime of helping the evil great Satan America assassinate Islam’s greatest hero, Bin Laden. And, per usual, we betray the Muslims who truly risk everything to do the right thing. . . and we befriend those Muslims (the majority) who would slit our throats in an instant, given the opportunity.
Since Dr. Afridi’s role in the Bin Laden kill was so important–and since he holds a senior government health post in Pakistan–it’s obvious that this man’s life would be in danger thereafter. So why didn’t Barack Obama, the CIA, and others involved make plans to evacuate the doctor with them or otherwise secrete him out of the country? Perhaps he didn’t want to go. But that’s unlikely, since he’d have to know that once he was found out it, the whole country would want to kill him. I do know, from my own experience representing the few moderate Muslims who actually exist and risk their lives to help the U.S. that we generally betray them (read about what America did to my Muslim clients, here and here), preferring to hug the HAMASniks at CAIR Action Network and “former” terrorists like Imad Hamad of ADC, who urged Detroit Muslims to go to a memorial service for the late leader of Hezbollah, Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah.
And one thing is certain: if we don’t get Dr. Afridi out of Pakistan, he will die, either at the hands of the government or at the hands of his countrymen, most of whom love Bin Laden and are enraged that we killed him on their soil and did it so skillfully and stealthily. The full names of nurses who helped him in getting Bin Laden’s DNA from the crappy Paki “mansion” are now being leaked all over anti-Semitic, extremist Paki websites. These people will be murdered for helping us.
More:
This isn’t how we get Muslim spies and friends to help us, that’s for sure. It’s how we get them to turn away.
From: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/39821/brave-muslim-betrayed-by-obama-takes-rap-for-bin-laden-kill/
Shakil Afridi is the rare pro-American Muslim who risked his life for America and might lose his life for it. Today, this medical doctor who helped the U.S. confirm that Osama Bin Laden was the guy living in that crappy Paki mansion . . . well, he sits in a Pakistani prison awaiting his fate, after he was arrest by the pro-Bin Laden ISI. He committed the ultimate crime of helping the evil great Satan America assassinate Islam’s greatest hero, Bin Laden. And, per usual, we betray the Muslims who truly risk everything to do the right thing. . . and we befriend those Muslims (the majority) who would slit our throats in an instant, given the opportunity.
Barack Obama & CIA’s Pannetta (Now SecDef) Betrayed Dr. Shakil Afridi
And one thing is certain: if we don’t get Dr. Afridi out of Pakistan, he will die, either at the hands of the government or at the hands of his countrymen, most of whom love Bin Laden and are enraged that we killed him on their soil and did it so skillfully and stealthily. The full names of nurses who helped him in getting Bin Laden’s DNA from the crappy Paki “mansion” are now being leaked all over anti-Semitic, extremist Paki websites. These people will be murdered for helping us.
More:
Pakistani authorities have jailed a doctor who worked for the CIA before the raid that killed Osama bin Laden to create an elaborate plot to get DNA samples from those living at the al-Qaida leader’s compound, as part of U.S. efforts to verify that bin Laden was there.
The doctor, Shakil Afridi, who holds a senior government health post in Pakistan, used nurses, who were able to gain entry to the residence on the pretext of giving vaccinations to children living there, according to Pakistani and U.S. officials and local residents. . . .
The doctor’s detention has added to the tension, and American authorities are thought to have intervened on his behalf. . . .
The doctor apparently is the only person still under arrest. His story provides previously unknown details about the lengths the CIA went to as it tried to confirm suspicions that bin Laden was hiding in the compound.
The doctor’s role was to help American officials know with certainty that bin Laden was in the compound, according to security officials and residents in Abbottabad, all of whom spoke only on the condition of anonymity because they feared government retribution. . . .Let’s say you were one of the infinitesmally small number of Muslims who would really risk their lives to help the West. Let’s say you read about Dr. Afridi rotting in a Paki jail hellhole and likely to face death, especially if he is released to freedom to the ire of his jihadist countrymen. After learning about his fate, would you still risk your life to help America?
The doctor was tasked with collecting DNA samples from those living in the house. A sample from any of the bin Laden children or grandchildren could be compared with DNA extracted from bin Laden’s sister, who died last year in a hospital in Boston.
This isn’t how we get Muslim spies and friends to help us, that’s for sure. It’s how we get them to turn away.
From: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/39821/brave-muslim-betrayed-by-obama-takes-rap-for-bin-laden-kill/
Fordson teacher involved in suit fired
DEARBORN — Dearborn Public Schools has fired one of two former Fordson teachers suing the district for religious discrimination and harassment.
Bryan Purcell was terminated after he failed to show up for a personnel hearing on May 23. Details of why the math teacher was fired are protected under privacy laws, and public school board records do not give any clues, although minutes from the public portion of the meeting include an e-mail Purcell submitted to the board.
In the e-mail, he called the allegations a “mountain of fiction” and continued to assert that since Imad Fadlallah became principal at Fordson High School in 2005, FHS administrators have systematically tried to force non-Arab and non-Muslim faculty out of the school.
“This a pattern of harassment and the hostile work environment he created has continued under Youssef Mosallam, and in fact, the harassment has been stepped up,” Purcell said in the email.
Fadlallah retired last summer and was replaced by Mosallam as principal.
Purcell’s attorney, Debbie Schlussel, said Purcell would fight his dismissal under the state’s teacher Tenure Act.
“It is obvious that the dismissal is pretextual, discriminatory, and retaliatory, and we intend to fight it all the way,” Schlussel said via email.
Schlussel, an ultra conservative commentator who calls the city “Dearbornistan” on her website, also said the suit against the district is ongoing. She declined in the email to provide additional comment because the case is still pending in U.S. District Court in Detroit.
Schlussel filed the suit in September on behalf of Purcell and Georgene Stergalas, a marketing teacher. Both the Fordson High School teachers said school administrators had harassed them because they were neither Arab nor Muslim.
Both claimed in the suit that administrators tried to drive them out by reassigning them to less desirable courses, putting troublemaking students in their rooms, and scheduling them to teach two classes at the same time in different areas of the building, among several other allegations.
When the suit was filed, both teachers had taken medical leave because of the stress caused by the situation. Purcell had taught in Dearborn for 10 years and Stergalas for 16.
Stergalas is now teaching at Dearborn High, said Brian Mustonen, Dearborn Public School’s communications coordinator. He confirmed the suit is still making its way through the courts.
School administrators have said since the beginning that the suit has no merit. Previous claims against Fadlallah had been unsubstantiated, they noted.
However, the suit was similar to one filed in 2009 by ousted wrestling coach Gerald Marszalek. He claimed he was forced out of his coaching job after 35 years because Fadlallah did not like that a volunteer assistant wrestling coach was doing Christian outreach work outside of school.
That suit was eventually settled out of court, the district said.
From: http://www.pressandguide.com/articles/2011/07/12/news/doc4e1c8aabbf25e615913007.txt?viewmode=fullstory
Tuesday, July 12, 2011
Obama says he cannot guarantee Social Security checks will go out on August 3
President Obama on Tuesday said he cannot guarantee that retirees will receive their Social Security checks August 3 if Democrats and Republicans in Washington do not reach an agreement on reducing the deficit in the coming weeks.
"I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue.
Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Mr. Obama said in an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley, according to excerpts released by CBS News.
The Obama administration and many economists have warned of economic catastrophe if the United States does not raise the amount it is legally allowed to borrow by August 2.
Lawmakers from both parties want to use the threat of that deadline to work out a broader package on long-term deficit reduction, with Republicans looking to cut trillions of dollars in federal spending, while Democrats are pushing for a more "balanced approach," which would include both spending cuts and increased revenue through taxes.
The Debt Limit fight: A primer
Democratic and Republican lawmakers are expected to hold another round of negotiations with Mr. Obama at the White House Tuesday afternoon on long-term deficit reduction, though talks have yielded little results to date.
Mr. Obama told Pelley "this is not just a matter of Social Security checks. These are veterans checks, these are folks on disability and their checks. There are about 70 million checks that go out."
The interview will air Tuesday evening on the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley.
Mr. Obama's comments followed remarks from the Senate's top Republican, who said Tuesday that he did not see a way for Republicans and Democrats to come to agreement on meaningful deficit reduction as long as Mr. Obama remains in office.
"After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable," Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor.
"The president has presented us with three choices: smoke and mirrors, tax hikes, or default. Republicans choose none of the above. I had hoped to do good, but I refuse to do harm. So Republicans will choose a path that actually reflects the will of the people, which is to do the responsible thing and ensure that the government doesn't default on its obligations," he said.
Mr. Obama has repeatedly said he wants a deal that would allow the U.S. to avoid confronting the issue again until after the 2012 elections and vowed on Monday that he would "not sign a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day extension."
"This the United States of America and, you know, we don't manage our affairs in three-month increments. You know, we don't risk U.S. default on our obligations because we can't put politics aside," Mr. Obama told reporters at the White House yesterday.
From: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20078789-503544.htm
"I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven't resolved this issue.
Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it," Mr. Obama said in an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley, according to excerpts released by CBS News.
The Obama administration and many economists have warned of economic catastrophe if the United States does not raise the amount it is legally allowed to borrow by August 2.
Lawmakers from both parties want to use the threat of that deadline to work out a broader package on long-term deficit reduction, with Republicans looking to cut trillions of dollars in federal spending, while Democrats are pushing for a more "balanced approach," which would include both spending cuts and increased revenue through taxes.
The Debt Limit fight: A primer
Democratic and Republican lawmakers are expected to hold another round of negotiations with Mr. Obama at the White House Tuesday afternoon on long-term deficit reduction, though talks have yielded little results to date.
Mr. Obama told Pelley "this is not just a matter of Social Security checks. These are veterans checks, these are folks on disability and their checks. There are about 70 million checks that go out."
The interview will air Tuesday evening on the CBS Evening News with Scott Pelley.
Mr. Obama's comments followed remarks from the Senate's top Republican, who said Tuesday that he did not see a way for Republicans and Democrats to come to agreement on meaningful deficit reduction as long as Mr. Obama remains in office.
"After years of discussions and months of negotiations, I have little question that as long as this president is in the Oval Office, a real solution is probably unattainable," Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in remarks on the Senate floor.
"The president has presented us with three choices: smoke and mirrors, tax hikes, or default. Republicans choose none of the above. I had hoped to do good, but I refuse to do harm. So Republicans will choose a path that actually reflects the will of the people, which is to do the responsible thing and ensure that the government doesn't default on its obligations," he said.
Mr. Obama has repeatedly said he wants a deal that would allow the U.S. to avoid confronting the issue again until after the 2012 elections and vowed on Monday that he would "not sign a 30-day or a 60-day or a 90-day extension."
"This the United States of America and, you know, we don't manage our affairs in three-month increments. You know, we don't risk U.S. default on our obligations because we can't put politics aside," Mr. Obama told reporters at the White House yesterday.
From: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20078789-503544.htm
Brian Dickerson: When judges violate the law, taxpayers pay the bill
Twice in the last six weeks, Dearborn District Judge Mark Somers has been summoned to other judges' courtrooms to answer allegations that he fired court employees in violation of Michigan law.
Twice, Somers testified that he had done nothing wrong.
And twice, jurors -- 16 in all, sitting in two different civil trials -- unanimously concluded otherwise, awarding two former employees more than $1.1 million in damages.
With attorney fees and interest, Somers' liability will almost certainly exceed $2 million -- even if a third ex-employee comes up empty when her whistle-blower lawsuit against Somers goes to trial next year.
But Somers isn't sweating. He's still pulling down his $138,000 salary as chief judge of Dearborn's district court. The assistant state attorney general who has defended him in all three lawsuits never sends him a bill. And Dearborn taxpayers will likely bear the cost of any damages ultimately collected by the plaintiffs -- just as taxpayers and municipal insurers in Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, West Bloomfield and Southgate were left holding the bag when lawsuits against judges in their communities were settled in the plaintiffs' favor.
What is more galling is that none of those judges has ever been removed from office, suspended or even publicly reprimanded by any disciplinary body.
Jurors have found the judges' conduct -- and their credibility as witnesses in their own defense -- wanting. But neither the Judicial Tenure Commission nor the Attorney Grievance Commission -- the organizations responsible for policing the ethical conduct of judges and lawyers -- concedes that those judges have done anything unethical.
So much for holding the men and women who oversee Michigan's courts to a higher standard.
Detroit attorney Joel Sklar, whose client was awarded $734,000 in her lawsuit against Somers, marvels that judges who have violated the law in their own courthouses continue to sit in judgment of others.
"You wonder," Sklar muses, "whether they think their black robes make them invincible, or just invisible."
Witnesses testified that the judges had turned on Horton in solidarity with a newly elected colleague who suspected her -- erroneously, as it turned out -- of plotting to embarrass his wife. Jurors learned that, at one point, Bloomfield Township detectives had staked out the Capitol Grille to determine if Horton was accepting free drinks from lawyers with business before the court.
All three judges implicated in Horton's allegations testified under oath that they had done nothing wrong -- a fact the attorney defending the district court underlined in his closing argument.
"Let's think about all the people who have to be lying to make (the plaintiff's case) work," the defense lawyer, Mark Paxton, told the jury. "Judge (Diane) D'Agostini has to be lying. Judge (Kimberly) Small has to be lying. Judge (Marc) Barron has to be lying."
But it took jurors only a couple of hours to agree that Horton was the one telling the truth. West Bloomfield and six other municipalities who fund the Bloomfield Hills District Court vowed to appeal the jury's $3.1-million judgment, but quietly agreed to a seven-figure settlement on the condition that Horton's attorneys agree not to reveal its value.
Shemka charged in a lawsuit that she was fired just days after she alerted the State Court Administrator's Office that Kandrevas was funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars into a secret bank account he and another court employee controlled.
In a 2010 deposition arising from the clerk's whistle-blower suit against the court, Judge Kandrevas invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination 222 times. The court's insurer subsequently settled the lawsuit against him for $300,000.
The deputy, Julie Pucci, alleged that Somers unlawfully eliminated her position after learning that she was living with her fiance, Dearborn District Judge William Hultgren. Jurors awarded her $732,000, including $200,000 in punitive damages.
Pucci's federal court judgment came less than a month after a Wayne County Circuit Court jury awarded $463,000 to former probation officer Simone Calvas. Calvas testified that she had incurred the devout Somers' displeasure by associating with Pucci and by conceiving twins out of wedlock.
Dearborn city attorneys have taken the public position that the city, which was not a defendant in Pucci's lawsuit, is not liable for any damages awarded to her. But a multitude of legal authorities and precedents suggest otherwise.
Ryan answered by reminding me that the commission "has a number of weapons to deal with these situations," including private "letters of reprimand" and "letters of caution," and that voters should not conclude that the absence of any public disciplinary action means that he and his JTC colleagues have been looking the other way.
But why, I asked Ryan, should the JTC hesitate to make a public example of judges whose misconduct has been exposed in public trials?
"Those are the rules under which we operate," Ryan answered. "It was determined that confidentiality was critical for the protection of the judiciary and the public."
Begging your pardon, counselor, but all judges work for the public -- and no one is served when the JTC and the bar conspire to sweep illegal judicial conduct under the rug.
"There is," as Ryan observed, "a ballot box" at which voters dissatisfied with the performance of elected judges can take action to remove them from office.
But attorneys are notoriously (and understandably) reluctant to challenge any sitting judge. And the JTC and the bar betray their profession when they refuse to call out judges who violate the law.
I covered each of the trials I've described in this column; I saw what jurors saw, and I understand why those jurors decided they couldn't trust the defendant judges who testified before them.
But journalists shouldn't bear the burden of policing bad judges alone -- and taxpayers shouldn't be left holding the bag when juries occasionally hold one of them accountable.
Contact Brian Dickerson: 313-222-6584 or bdickerson@freepress.com
Twice, Somers testified that he had done nothing wrong.
And twice, jurors -- 16 in all, sitting in two different civil trials -- unanimously concluded otherwise, awarding two former employees more than $1.1 million in damages.
With attorney fees and interest, Somers' liability will almost certainly exceed $2 million -- even if a third ex-employee comes up empty when her whistle-blower lawsuit against Somers goes to trial next year.
But Somers isn't sweating. He's still pulling down his $138,000 salary as chief judge of Dearborn's district court. The assistant state attorney general who has defended him in all three lawsuits never sends him a bill. And Dearborn taxpayers will likely bear the cost of any damages ultimately collected by the plaintiffs -- just as taxpayers and municipal insurers in Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, West Bloomfield and Southgate were left holding the bag when lawsuits against judges in their communities were settled in the plaintiffs' favor.
What is more galling is that none of those judges has ever been removed from office, suspended or even publicly reprimanded by any disciplinary body.
Jurors have found the judges' conduct -- and their credibility as witnesses in their own defense -- wanting. But neither the Judicial Tenure Commission nor the Attorney Grievance Commission -- the organizations responsible for policing the ethical conduct of judges and lawyers -- concedes that those judges have done anything unethical.
So much for holding the men and women who oversee Michigan's courts to a higher standard.
Detroit attorney Joel Sklar, whose client was awarded $734,000 in her lawsuit against Somers, marvels that judges who have violated the law in their own courthouses continue to sit in judgment of others.
"You wonder," Sklar muses, "whether they think their black robes make them invincible, or just invisible."
A lack of credibility
In 2006, a jury awarded $3.1 million in damages to Michelle Horton, a former Bloomfield Hills District Court employee of the year who complained that the court's sitting judges had colluded to fire her illegally.Witnesses testified that the judges had turned on Horton in solidarity with a newly elected colleague who suspected her -- erroneously, as it turned out -- of plotting to embarrass his wife. Jurors learned that, at one point, Bloomfield Township detectives had staked out the Capitol Grille to determine if Horton was accepting free drinks from lawyers with business before the court.
All three judges implicated in Horton's allegations testified under oath that they had done nothing wrong -- a fact the attorney defending the district court underlined in his closing argument.
"Let's think about all the people who have to be lying to make (the plaintiff's case) work," the defense lawyer, Mark Paxton, told the jury. "Judge (Diane) D'Agostini has to be lying. Judge (Kimberly) Small has to be lying. Judge (Marc) Barron has to be lying."
But it took jurors only a couple of hours to agree that Horton was the one telling the truth. West Bloomfield and six other municipalities who fund the Bloomfield Hills District Court vowed to appeal the jury's $3.1-million judgment, but quietly agreed to a seven-figure settlement on the condition that Horton's attorneys agree not to reveal its value.
Taking the Fifth
Jurors never got to hear Southgate District Judge James Kandrevas' response to allegations he fired his court clerk, Lori Shemka, after she blew the whistle on Kandrevas' unethical conduct.Shemka charged in a lawsuit that she was fired just days after she alerted the State Court Administrator's Office that Kandrevas was funneling hundreds of thousands of dollars into a secret bank account he and another court employee controlled.
In a 2010 deposition arising from the clerk's whistle-blower suit against the court, Judge Kandrevas invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination 222 times. The court's insurer subsequently settled the lawsuit against him for $300,000.
Answering to a higher authority?
The two juries that awarded more than $1.1 million to former Dearborn District Court employees heard testimony that Somers was a zealously religious man who questioned defendants about their church attendance and retaliated when a deputy court administrator complained that he was proselytizing from the bench.The deputy, Julie Pucci, alleged that Somers unlawfully eliminated her position after learning that she was living with her fiance, Dearborn District Judge William Hultgren. Jurors awarded her $732,000, including $200,000 in punitive damages.
Pucci's federal court judgment came less than a month after a Wayne County Circuit Court jury awarded $463,000 to former probation officer Simone Calvas. Calvas testified that she had incurred the devout Somers' displeasure by associating with Pucci and by conceiving twins out of wedlock.
Dearborn city attorneys have taken the public position that the city, which was not a defendant in Pucci's lawsuit, is not liable for any damages awarded to her. But a multitude of legal authorities and precedents suggest otherwise.
Discipline on the QT?
Late last week, I asked Tom Ryan, a former State Bar of Michigan president who currently serves as chairman of the Judicial Tenure Commission, why the JTC had taken no disciplinary action against any of the judges who jurors determined had violated the law.Ryan answered by reminding me that the commission "has a number of weapons to deal with these situations," including private "letters of reprimand" and "letters of caution," and that voters should not conclude that the absence of any public disciplinary action means that he and his JTC colleagues have been looking the other way.
But why, I asked Ryan, should the JTC hesitate to make a public example of judges whose misconduct has been exposed in public trials?
"Those are the rules under which we operate," Ryan answered. "It was determined that confidentiality was critical for the protection of the judiciary and the public."
Begging your pardon, counselor, but all judges work for the public -- and no one is served when the JTC and the bar conspire to sweep illegal judicial conduct under the rug.
"There is," as Ryan observed, "a ballot box" at which voters dissatisfied with the performance of elected judges can take action to remove them from office.
But attorneys are notoriously (and understandably) reluctant to challenge any sitting judge. And the JTC and the bar betray their profession when they refuse to call out judges who violate the law.
I covered each of the trials I've described in this column; I saw what jurors saw, and I understand why those jurors decided they couldn't trust the defendant judges who testified before them.
But journalists shouldn't bear the burden of policing bad judges alone -- and taxpayers shouldn't be left holding the bag when juries occasionally hold one of them accountable.
Contact Brian Dickerson: 313-222-6584 or bdickerson@freepress.com
Report: Gaza Terrorists use Google Earth to Pinpoint Targets
by Maayana Miskin
Terrorists in Gaza have a new tool helping them to fire on innocent civilians living in southern Israel – the popular satellite mapping program Google Earth. A group of terrorists from the Al-Aksa Martyrs' Brigades recently described their use of the program to a reporter for Slate Magazine.
“The technology is always improving,” a terrorist calling himself Abu Saif told journalist Sharon Weinberger. “Our struggle started with the Kalashnikov, and then it moved to the suicide bomb, then the locally made rocket, and now the Grad rocket.”
Gaza's rocket launching crews use Google Earth to aim their weapons, Abu Said said. The program is seen as superior to maps because it is more up-to-date and gives precise locations for potential targets.
Terrorists who spoke to Weinberger said they plan to continue with rocket attacks despite the deployment of the Iron Dome system, which shoots short-range rockets out of the air. “The Israelis are using a lot of money for this defense, but during the last rocket attacks, our rockets made it through,” explained Abu Hamza, a senior Islamic Jihad terrorist.
Abu Saif suggested that terrorists were getting their hands on new technologies that would help them continue attacks. “At some point in the future, the Grad will be a thing of the past,” said Abu Saif.
Terrorists are believed to have used a laser-guided missile in a recent attack on a school bus that murdered Israeli teenager Daniel Viflic.
Another way in which terrorists are using modern technology is public relations. They have begun making their own videos to send to the media in hopes of gaining support. One recent video filmed by Abu Saif's group was sent to Al Jazeera.
“In some way, rocket making has almost become an extreme form of reality television,” Weinberger suggested, “with the militants understanding that playing to the cameras is as important as, or perhaps more important than, actually launching rockets.”
“The technology is always improving,” a terrorist calling himself Abu Saif told journalist Sharon Weinberger. “Our struggle started with the Kalashnikov, and then it moved to the suicide bomb, then the locally made rocket, and now the Grad rocket.”
Gaza's rocket launching crews use Google Earth to aim their weapons, Abu Said said. The program is seen as superior to maps because it is more up-to-date and gives precise locations for potential targets.
Terrorists who spoke to Weinberger said they plan to continue with rocket attacks despite the deployment of the Iron Dome system, which shoots short-range rockets out of the air. “The Israelis are using a lot of money for this defense, but during the last rocket attacks, our rockets made it through,” explained Abu Hamza, a senior Islamic Jihad terrorist.
Abu Saif suggested that terrorists were getting their hands on new technologies that would help them continue attacks. “At some point in the future, the Grad will be a thing of the past,” said Abu Saif.
Terrorists are believed to have used a laser-guided missile in a recent attack on a school bus that murdered Israeli teenager Daniel Viflic.
Another way in which terrorists are using modern technology is public relations. They have begun making their own videos to send to the media in hopes of gaining support. One recent video filmed by Abu Saif's group was sent to Al Jazeera.
“In some way, rocket making has almost become an extreme form of reality television,” Weinberger suggested, “with the militants understanding that playing to the cameras is as important as, or perhaps more important than, actually launching rockets.”
Sunday, July 10, 2011
Party Like It’s 699: Prince Says Islam is Fun, Applauds Burqas
By Debbie Schlussel
Remember Prince a/k/a Prince Rogers Nelson, the height-challenged, has-been ’80s pop star whose sleazy, lascivious lyrics were all the rage? When it comes to the sexual liberation he was pimping on America, he apparently stops at Dar Al-Islam, the Islamic border–you know, out of respect. He thinks Islamic countries are fun and that it’s cool to force women to wear burqas. Apparently, a new song, “Raspberry Niqab,” is in order.
Check out what he told the UK’s Guardian. Even the pro-Muslim Guardian isn’t too keen on his comments:
Yeah, it’s just “people being unhappy” to not to want to wear Islamic garb of oppression. Whatta moron. What if I said: yeah, racism and slavery of Black people–the Blacks have no choice and are happy with that. What–Black people don’t like it? There are people who are unhappy with everything. There’s a dark side to everything. Imbecile.
Gee, I wonder if he ever tried performing his “Darling Nikki” song in any of the “fun,” burqa-encrusted Muslim countries. I wonder how his lyrics about Nikki masturbating and “grinding” with her “devices” would go over.
Despite all his raunchy, explicit lyrics, it’s long been rumored that Prince is gay. And you know how “fun” it is to be gay in Islamic countries, right? Apparently, he doesn’t.
And we know for sure that he’s Black. I guess he thinks it’s “fun” to be treated as second-class, as Islam is a very racist religion, and Muslims refer to Blacks (Muslim or not) as “abed” or “abeed”–Arabic singular and plural for slave, which is used in place of the n-word.
These same showbiz scumbags who always attack Christian Americans with values, have no problem with the real threat of Muslims who instantly behead people for looking the wrong way.
Another case of Shut Up and Sing. Except in Prince’s case, it’s just, SHUT. UP.
From: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/39663/party-like-its-699-prince-says-islam-is-fun-applauds-burqas/
Remember Prince a/k/a Prince Rogers Nelson, the height-challenged, has-been ’80s pop star whose sleazy, lascivious lyrics were all the rage? When it comes to the sexual liberation he was pimping on America, he apparently stops at Dar Al-Islam, the Islamic border–you know, out of respect. He thinks Islamic countries are fun and that it’s cool to force women to wear burqas. Apparently, a new song, “Raspberry Niqab,” is in order.
Prince: Islam is Fun, Burqas are Happy Wear!
Sometimes he seems a little too fond of boundaries. “It’s fun being in Islamic countries, to know there’s only one religion. There’s order. You wear a burqa. There’s no choice. People are happy with that.” But what about women who are unhappy about having to wearing burqas? “There are people who are unhappy with everything,” he says shruggingly. “There’s a dark side to everything.”Hey, wasn’t he juror #4 at the Casey Anthony trial?
Yeah, it’s just “people being unhappy” to not to want to wear Islamic garb of oppression. Whatta moron. What if I said: yeah, racism and slavery of Black people–the Blacks have no choice and are happy with that. What–Black people don’t like it? There are people who are unhappy with everything. There’s a dark side to everything. Imbecile.
Gee, I wonder if he ever tried performing his “Darling Nikki” song in any of the “fun,” burqa-encrusted Muslim countries. I wonder how his lyrics about Nikki masturbating and “grinding” with her “devices” would go over.
Despite all his raunchy, explicit lyrics, it’s long been rumored that Prince is gay. And you know how “fun” it is to be gay in Islamic countries, right? Apparently, he doesn’t.
And we know for sure that he’s Black. I guess he thinks it’s “fun” to be treated as second-class, as Islam is a very racist religion, and Muslims refer to Blacks (Muslim or not) as “abed” or “abeed”–Arabic singular and plural for slave, which is used in place of the n-word.
These same showbiz scumbags who always attack Christian Americans with values, have no problem with the real threat of Muslims who instantly behead people for looking the wrong way.
Another case of Shut Up and Sing. Except in Prince’s case, it’s just, SHUT. UP.
From: http://www.debbieschlussel.com/39663/party-like-its-699-prince-says-islam-is-fun-applauds-burqas/
Group: LA Sheriff Lee Baca must be fired for praising Hamas-linked CAIR
via Jihad Watch:
separatist group of Islamists flanked by elected dhimmis.
More on Baca’s sedition:
And from Concerned Citizens for The First Amendment (CCFA):
From: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/07/09/group-la-sheriff-lee-baca-must-be-fired-for-praising-hamas-linked-cair/
…Concerned Citizens for the First Amendment are leading a demonstration on Friday, July 29, here in downtown Los Angeles, asking the Los Angeles county board of supervisors to fire the compromised and clueless Sheriff Lee Baca. Here is their announcement:
L.A. Sheriff Baca must be fired for praising organizations with ties to terrorismSan Diego: Christian leaders in Southern California are calling on the L.A. County Board of Supervisors to fire Sheriff L. D. Baca for comments he made praising the Council on American Islamic Relations, a group with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood; both have been linked to terrorist activities.
See Sheriff Baca’s remarks at
“I fled to America with my family because of the violence directed against me for my Christian faith,” said Joseph Nasralla, founder of The Way T.V. satellite network. “Sheriff Baca must be fired, and the County must apologize to all of us who have suffered at the hands of the Muslim Brotherhood.”
“Sheriff Baca’s praise for an organization with known ties to Islamic terrorism is outrageous and is an affront to all the victims of Islamic terror,” said Dr. Gary Cass of DefendChristians.Org. “This infiltration of law enforcement by those with sympathies for organizations that support Muslim violence is terrifying for Christians who have fled to the U.S. because of Muslim violence. Sheriff Baca must go!”
“We are alarmed that Sheriff Baca, who has sworn to protect us from all enemies, foreign and domestic, is making public statements in support of The Muslim Brotherhood,” said Steve Klein, of Concerned Citizens for the For the First Amendment. “We demand he be fired and that the L.A. Sheriff department make an unequivocal statement renouncing the work of the Muslim Brotherhood.”
The motto of The Muslim Brotherhood is:
Allah is our objective.
The Prophet is our leader.
Qur’an is our law.
Jihad is our way.
Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.
The Logo of the Muslim Brotherhood has at the top with two crossed swords and at the bottom, the Arabic verse from the Qur’an, Sura 8:60, “And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war to terrorize the enemy of Allah and your enemy.” The direct meaning of this to Muslims is be prepared to terrorize non-Muslims. Translated by Abdullah al-Araby.Muslim American Homeland Security Department? Why do they need their own “homeland security department?” At least one blog covered this
More on Baca’s sedition:
- Baca to spend July 4th weekend at 48th Annual Muslim Brotherhood-linked ISNA Convention
- LA Sheriff Lee Baca’s multiple Muslim Outreach programs
- LA Sheriff who testified before Congress has ties to terror-linked CAIR
- LA sheriff gives Muslim men helicopter tours of patrol stations
And from Concerned Citizens for The First Amendment (CCFA):
Concerned Citizens for the First Amendment (CCFA) will conduct a First Amendment educational outreach on the public sidewalk in front of The Los Angeles County Administration Building from about 11:00 AM to about 2:00 PM on Friday July 29, 2011
* Simply go to the Constitutions of the Global Muslim Nations and all but 3 begin with Islam is the basis of our law. The 3 that do not base their fundamental law on Islam are Turkey, Indonesia and Malaya.
From: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/07/09/group-la-sheriff-lee-baca-must-be-fired-for-praising-hamas-linked-cair/
Friday, July 8, 2011
Captain Paul Fields petition please sign...
Because of my love of freedom, I have long been a student of our colonial and founding era. Words cannot describe how much I have learned studying the writings of the Founding Fathers.
Four days ago we celebrated the 235th birthday of our country, a country birthed out of passionate desire for liberty and self-governance.
Against that backdrop, police Captain Paul Fields was demoted and suspended because he refused to surrender his constitutional rights when ordered to attend an Islamic proselytizing event held at a Muslim Brotherhood-connected Islamic Center.
Sadly, very little attention has been paid to this in the media, even in the more conservative talk radio media. So why have we at ACT! for America decided this is an issue we need to aggressively fight?
Here’s why, and it’s the same reason our friends at the Thomas More Law Center have filed a lawsuit on his behalf.
Protecting freedom.
I have no quarrel with government officials choosing, voluntarily, to attend religious events of various faiths. But Captain Fields should never have been compelled to attend an Islamic service and observe classes on Islamic beliefs, simply because he was a police officer and was ordered by his superior to do so.
Would the ACLU sit by quietly if a Muslim officer were ordered to attend a Sunday morning Christian service, called “Law Enforcement Appreciation Day?” We all know the answer to that.
If the disciplinary action taken against Captain Fields is allowed to stand, without protest or outrage, the message sent to government officials, not only in Tulsa but across the country, is that they can compel subordinates to attend Islamic events, and no one will resist.
As much as Islamic terrorism concerns me, I am as concerned about the threat radical Islam—and the political correctness that enables it—poses to our freedoms.
That threat is incremental, where tyranny chips away at freedom little by little, until one day freedom is gone.
Just ask Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, our chapter leader in Austria who was recently convicted of “denigrating a religion,” about incremental loss of freedom.
Our Founding Fathers understood incremental loss of freedom. That’s why they protested even small taxes imposed on them unlawfully, not because the amounts were large, but because of the precedents they set.
We at ACT! for America do not have the human or financial resources to engage every issue or fight every fight. But the case of Captain Paul Fields is one we must rise up and fight.
Government officials in Tulsa need to know there are Americans who will resist politically-correct driven assaults on our freedom. The Islamic Center of Tulsa needs to know this. Groups like CAIR and ISNA need to know this. Government officials around the country need to know this.
If we, as an organization, make a strong enough and loud enough stand, they will know.
Because if we don’t, what will be next—the Mayor of Tulsa ordering his staff to attend a Ramadan Iftar dinner?
If you cherish freedom as I do, and you haven’t already done so, please join us in adding your name to our petition calling for the reinstatement of Captain Fields. We’re only 4,000 signatures short of our goal.
Thank you.
Yours for a safe—and free—America,
Guy Rodgers
Four days ago we celebrated the 235th birthday of our country, a country birthed out of passionate desire for liberty and self-governance.
Against that backdrop, police Captain Paul Fields was demoted and suspended because he refused to surrender his constitutional rights when ordered to attend an Islamic proselytizing event held at a Muslim Brotherhood-connected Islamic Center.
Sadly, very little attention has been paid to this in the media, even in the more conservative talk radio media. So why have we at ACT! for America decided this is an issue we need to aggressively fight?
Here’s why, and it’s the same reason our friends at the Thomas More Law Center have filed a lawsuit on his behalf.
Protecting freedom.
I have no quarrel with government officials choosing, voluntarily, to attend religious events of various faiths. But Captain Fields should never have been compelled to attend an Islamic service and observe classes on Islamic beliefs, simply because he was a police officer and was ordered by his superior to do so.
Would the ACLU sit by quietly if a Muslim officer were ordered to attend a Sunday morning Christian service, called “Law Enforcement Appreciation Day?” We all know the answer to that.
If the disciplinary action taken against Captain Fields is allowed to stand, without protest or outrage, the message sent to government officials, not only in Tulsa but across the country, is that they can compel subordinates to attend Islamic events, and no one will resist.
As much as Islamic terrorism concerns me, I am as concerned about the threat radical Islam—and the political correctness that enables it—poses to our freedoms.
That threat is incremental, where tyranny chips away at freedom little by little, until one day freedom is gone.
Just ask Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, our chapter leader in Austria who was recently convicted of “denigrating a religion,” about incremental loss of freedom.
Our Founding Fathers understood incremental loss of freedom. That’s why they protested even small taxes imposed on them unlawfully, not because the amounts were large, but because of the precedents they set.
We at ACT! for America do not have the human or financial resources to engage every issue or fight every fight. But the case of Captain Paul Fields is one we must rise up and fight.
Government officials in Tulsa need to know there are Americans who will resist politically-correct driven assaults on our freedom. The Islamic Center of Tulsa needs to know this. Groups like CAIR and ISNA need to know this. Government officials around the country need to know this.
If we, as an organization, make a strong enough and loud enough stand, they will know.
|
If you cherish freedom as I do, and you haven’t already done so, please join us in adding your name to our petition calling for the reinstatement of Captain Fields. We’re only 4,000 signatures short of our goal.
Thank you.
Yours for a safe—and free—America,
Guy Rodgers
Islam the Alien
For me, most science fiction stories have a credibility problem. But the one branch of it whose premise I have always rejected is that alien life could be both malevolent and technologically advanced enough to embark on interstellar conquests. Films such as Predator and Independence Day – just two of the more popular instances of the genre among many – portray aliens stalking man as a species of game or subjugating or extinguishing him. The premise that projects the possibility of these creatures is that a preeminently hostile, anti-life-form could somehow apply reason to create spaceships and sophisticated weaponry.
However, life-forms so malevolent would never rise from the rank swamps that bred them to go zipping around star systems and blasting planets to atoms. Malevolence is not a progenitor of innovation or creation. It is fundamentally a parasite and can thrive only on a passive or willing host. Reason is not an attribute or a handmaiden of evil. Evil in fact can only exploit the products of reason, but never originate them. Evil men or evil aliens may exhibit intelligence, but not reason. They can exploit what reason has caused to exist, but never bring it into existence
Ugly predators and slimy aliens that can invent cloaking devices and disintegrating rays are possible in imagination only because of a fantastic, and possibly even fatal, fallacy. Their creators – and their fans – assume that reason is not the natural antithesis and enemy of anti-reason, but a morally neutral faculty that can ally itself with anti-reason in campaigns of conquest and death.
Not so coincidentally, the fallacy also explains the left’s hostility to freedom and capitalism. Capitalists, they say, have the freedom to employ reason to create things, and then use their profits to establish power and enslave everyone.
Sharks, rattlesnakes, Komodo dragons, wolves, and other predators are not inherently evil. They do what nature has programmed them to do, without any choice in their struggles for existence. No moral decisions are involved in their actions. Their values are predetermined. They lack the attribute of volition, that is, the capacity to think or not to think, to choose what will sustain and improve their lives and what will not.
A malevolent intelligence is not a contraction in terms. Else how to explain all the real and fictional villains in history and literature, from Hitler to Professor Moriarty, from Attila the Hun to Ellsworth Toohey? Or Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his threatened nuclear weapons? But a malevolent adherent to reason, like the aliens in Predator and Independence Day, is a psychological, metaphysical and philosophical contradiction. In nature, the teleology of such alien creatures is impossible.
A malevolent intelligence may succeed in finding comfort in a social and material environment created by reason, and be able to exploit its victims’ innocence,foolishness, orignorance. But without reason having created such a world, it would remain a miserable prisoner in the dank, fetid jungle it was born in, never able to conceive of anything better, unable by its nature to look up at the stars, content with its surroundings, and concerned only with its next meal. Thomas Hobbes’ notion of man at war is equally and more realistically applicable to the actual existence of would-be predator space aliens in their basic mode: solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
Which leads me to Islam.
Islam is a malevolent, ideational predator bent on conquest. It demands conversion, submission, or death. Left to its own devices, Islam would have remained contained by and confined to its own impotence whence it came, the Mideast, in Saudi Arabia. It would be a bubonic rat that squeaked but which would otherwise be quarantined by its own irrationality, and by reason.
But what has given Islam its purported potency to wreak havoc in the world? It is a philosophy burdened with the same fallacy that allows science fiction writers to believe that reason can ally with anti-reason and act of its own accord. In past columns I have likened Islam to a drooling beast, to the Borg, to a viral disease, and to other entities closed to reason, proof against freedom, and dedicated to destruction for destruction’s sake. .
Pragmatic policies in the West allowed the nomadic, primitive Saudis and other tribalists to nationalize the oil which Western technology discovered and developed in the barren wastes over which they had been butchering each other and other tribes for millennia. Environmentalist policies that prohibit oil drilling allow smug tribalists to make extortion a practical policy. Pragmatic policies allowed Muslims to immigrateto semi-free, semi-rational cultures and proceed to complete the sabotaging disease of irrationality. Pragmatism sired moral and cultural relativism that forbids moral judgment of Islam’s barbarism and its incipient, cradle-to-grave psychosis. Appropriating the mantle of “religious freedom” – call it a “cloaking device,” if you will – and exploiting the foolishness and irrationality of their enemies, Islamic activists in three-piece suits and armed with unlimited funds work obsessively to erase freedom for all but Muslims.
Pragmatism fosters the growth of a police state whose managers and minions, in the name of political correctness and non-discrimination, will not identify Islam as a predatory ideology (that would be evidence of “Islamaphobia,” and “offensive”), and proceed to subject and inure a country’s citizens to the invasive ministrations of arbitrary searches, seizures, and incarceration on the chance that they might catch a bomber whose motives will not be linked to Islam. Their policy, designed to not offend Muslims but all non-Muslims, is to hope to find a scimitar in an infinite haystack. The Department of Homeland Security is headed by a multiculturalist friendly to Islam, while the TSA is staffed by tens of thousands of non-entities empowered to grope, violate, molest, rob, and hold judgment over private citizens in the name of “safety.”
The anti-profiling policies of the DHS and TSA are anti-reason, and anti-Aristotelian, and as “alien” as the ends of a Predator or shapeless alien piloting five-mile-wide spaceships.
Islam is such a unique, unprecedented peril that one ignores it at one’s own peril. There is the double peril of Obama, Pelosi, et al. (and the generations of collectivist thought behind them) wanting to “transform” the country into a secular State of Servitude (no pun intended), and of Islam, whose spokesmen are at work insinuating its brand of totalitarianism into the country via “religious freedom,” but whose purpose is also to “transform” the country into another kind of State of Servitude. In this teleological end Islamists have a willing ally, the secular totalitarians.
Saul Alinsky, meet Sheikh Ahmad Gadof the Muslim Brotherhood, another malevolent intelligence.
Islam is a radically different matter. None of the other religious groups in America – whether they are composed largely of immigrants or of tenth generation blacks or whites or Asians or Eskimos -- expects the other creeds to defer to it. Muslims and Islam, however, expect everyone to defer to Islam. Islam is an enemy of individualism. Islam is imbued with a code of conduct that is fundamentally barbaric and concrete-bound and too often murderous. Sharia is not just a primitive system of adjudication; it is also, and inherently, political. It does not recognize the world beyond that insular system, except as something to assimilate into its system, or to erase.
The corrupting norms of multiculturalism have vastly aided Muslims in their not having to knuckle under secular law and having to stop murdering wayward daughters and wives and sons who become apostates. Furthermore, feminists, liberals, leftists in and out of academia ignore the outrages committed by Muslims in the name of Islam – the continuingrapesof ‘infidel” women in Europe and the Mideast by Muslims, the stonings, hangings, and executions of men and women who flout Islamic rules, the persecution and murders of Christians, Jews, Hindus in the name of Islam, and so on – because they recognize Islam as a bird of the same feather – a totalitarian system that shares similar premises, methods, and ends. Criticism of rival totalitarians might inadvertently lead to criticism of their own anti-reason and anti-life policies. Call the phenomenon a Collectivist-Islamic Non-Aggression Pact.
Predatory “aliens” need not come from outer space. There are two species of them right here on earth, both exercising their malevolent intelligences to advance their dual agendas of conquest, slavery, and destruction. They are merely rivals, and not antipodes of each other.
As Gilliatt did in Victor Hugo’s compelling novel, Toilers of the Sea, as he was being enveloped by an octopus’s arms, and as the creature’s flesh-tearing beak struggled to strike him, we need to free ourselves from Islamic jihad not by cutting off its arms: but its head. Only reason and rationality can accomplish that end. That done, the arms will go limp and release us to pursue our life-affirming values in freedom without peril or hindrance. It is the ideology that must be damned, renounced, repudiated, and defeated, with no apologies or regrets, and not its surface manifestations.
Then we will have the time to turn our attention to performing the same surgery on the secular totalitarian ideology that also seeks to vanquish this country.
However, life-forms so malevolent would never rise from the rank swamps that bred them to go zipping around star systems and blasting planets to atoms. Malevolence is not a progenitor of innovation or creation. It is fundamentally a parasite and can thrive only on a passive or willing host. Reason is not an attribute or a handmaiden of evil. Evil in fact can only exploit the products of reason, but never originate them. Evil men or evil aliens may exhibit intelligence, but not reason. They can exploit what reason has caused to exist, but never bring it into existence
Ugly predators and slimy aliens that can invent cloaking devices and disintegrating rays are possible in imagination only because of a fantastic, and possibly even fatal, fallacy. Their creators – and their fans – assume that reason is not the natural antithesis and enemy of anti-reason, but a morally neutral faculty that can ally itself with anti-reason in campaigns of conquest and death.
Not so coincidentally, the fallacy also explains the left’s hostility to freedom and capitalism. Capitalists, they say, have the freedom to employ reason to create things, and then use their profits to establish power and enslave everyone.
Sharks, rattlesnakes, Komodo dragons, wolves, and other predators are not inherently evil. They do what nature has programmed them to do, without any choice in their struggles for existence. No moral decisions are involved in their actions. Their values are predetermined. They lack the attribute of volition, that is, the capacity to think or not to think, to choose what will sustain and improve their lives and what will not.
A malevolent intelligence is not a contraction in terms. Else how to explain all the real and fictional villains in history and literature, from Hitler to Professor Moriarty, from Attila the Hun to Ellsworth Toohey? Or Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his threatened nuclear weapons? But a malevolent adherent to reason, like the aliens in Predator and Independence Day, is a psychological, metaphysical and philosophical contradiction. In nature, the teleology of such alien creatures is impossible.
A malevolent intelligence may succeed in finding comfort in a social and material environment created by reason, and be able to exploit its victims’ innocence,foolishness, orignorance. But without reason having created such a world, it would remain a miserable prisoner in the dank, fetid jungle it was born in, never able to conceive of anything better, unable by its nature to look up at the stars, content with its surroundings, and concerned only with its next meal. Thomas Hobbes’ notion of man at war is equally and more realistically applicable to the actual existence of would-be predator space aliens in their basic mode: solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
Which leads me to Islam.
Islam is a malevolent, ideational predator bent on conquest. It demands conversion, submission, or death. Left to its own devices, Islam would have remained contained by and confined to its own impotence whence it came, the Mideast, in Saudi Arabia. It would be a bubonic rat that squeaked but which would otherwise be quarantined by its own irrationality, and by reason.
But what has given Islam its purported potency to wreak havoc in the world? It is a philosophy burdened with the same fallacy that allows science fiction writers to believe that reason can ally with anti-reason and act of its own accord. In past columns I have likened Islam to a drooling beast, to the Borg, to a viral disease, and to other entities closed to reason, proof against freedom, and dedicated to destruction for destruction’s sake. .
Pragmatic policies in the West allowed the nomadic, primitive Saudis and other tribalists to nationalize the oil which Western technology discovered and developed in the barren wastes over which they had been butchering each other and other tribes for millennia. Environmentalist policies that prohibit oil drilling allow smug tribalists to make extortion a practical policy. Pragmatic policies allowed Muslims to immigrateto semi-free, semi-rational cultures and proceed to complete the sabotaging disease of irrationality. Pragmatism sired moral and cultural relativism that forbids moral judgment of Islam’s barbarism and its incipient, cradle-to-grave psychosis. Appropriating the mantle of “religious freedom” – call it a “cloaking device,” if you will – and exploiting the foolishness and irrationality of their enemies, Islamic activists in three-piece suits and armed with unlimited funds work obsessively to erase freedom for all but Muslims.
Pragmatism fosters the growth of a police state whose managers and minions, in the name of political correctness and non-discrimination, will not identify Islam as a predatory ideology (that would be evidence of “Islamaphobia,” and “offensive”), and proceed to subject and inure a country’s citizens to the invasive ministrations of arbitrary searches, seizures, and incarceration on the chance that they might catch a bomber whose motives will not be linked to Islam. Their policy, designed to not offend Muslims but all non-Muslims, is to hope to find a scimitar in an infinite haystack. The Department of Homeland Security is headed by a multiculturalist friendly to Islam, while the TSA is staffed by tens of thousands of non-entities empowered to grope, violate, molest, rob, and hold judgment over private citizens in the name of “safety.”
The anti-profiling policies of the DHS and TSA are anti-reason, and anti-Aristotelian, and as “alien” as the ends of a Predator or shapeless alien piloting five-mile-wide spaceships.
Islam is such a unique, unprecedented peril that one ignores it at one’s own peril. There is the double peril of Obama, Pelosi, et al. (and the generations of collectivist thought behind them) wanting to “transform” the country into a secular State of Servitude (no pun intended), and of Islam, whose spokesmen are at work insinuating its brand of totalitarianism into the country via “religious freedom,” but whose purpose is also to “transform” the country into another kind of State of Servitude. In this teleological end Islamists have a willing ally, the secular totalitarians.
Saul Alinsky, meet Sheikh Ahmad Gadof the Muslim Brotherhood, another malevolent intelligence.
Islam is a radically different matter. None of the other religious groups in America – whether they are composed largely of immigrants or of tenth generation blacks or whites or Asians or Eskimos -- expects the other creeds to defer to it. Muslims and Islam, however, expect everyone to defer to Islam. Islam is an enemy of individualism. Islam is imbued with a code of conduct that is fundamentally barbaric and concrete-bound and too often murderous. Sharia is not just a primitive system of adjudication; it is also, and inherently, political. It does not recognize the world beyond that insular system, except as something to assimilate into its system, or to erase.
The corrupting norms of multiculturalism have vastly aided Muslims in their not having to knuckle under secular law and having to stop murdering wayward daughters and wives and sons who become apostates. Furthermore, feminists, liberals, leftists in and out of academia ignore the outrages committed by Muslims in the name of Islam – the continuingrapesof ‘infidel” women in Europe and the Mideast by Muslims, the stonings, hangings, and executions of men and women who flout Islamic rules, the persecution and murders of Christians, Jews, Hindus in the name of Islam, and so on – because they recognize Islam as a bird of the same feather – a totalitarian system that shares similar premises, methods, and ends. Criticism of rival totalitarians might inadvertently lead to criticism of their own anti-reason and anti-life policies. Call the phenomenon a Collectivist-Islamic Non-Aggression Pact.
Predatory “aliens” need not come from outer space. There are two species of them right here on earth, both exercising their malevolent intelligences to advance their dual agendas of conquest, slavery, and destruction. They are merely rivals, and not antipodes of each other.
As Gilliatt did in Victor Hugo’s compelling novel, Toilers of the Sea, as he was being enveloped by an octopus’s arms, and as the creature’s flesh-tearing beak struggled to strike him, we need to free ourselves from Islamic jihad not by cutting off its arms: but its head. Only reason and rationality can accomplish that end. That done, the arms will go limp and release us to pursue our life-affirming values in freedom without peril or hindrance. It is the ideology that must be damned, renounced, repudiated, and defeated, with no apologies or regrets, and not its surface manifestations.
Then we will have the time to turn our attention to performing the same surgery on the secular totalitarian ideology that also seeks to vanquish this country.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Edward Cline is the author of a number of novels, and his essays, books, reviews, and other nonfiction have appeared in a number of high-profile periodicals.
Wednesday, July 6, 2011
List of Smuggling Attempts By Sea to Hamas, Hezbollah, Other Terrorist Organizations
Below are some of the attempts by terror sponsoring states to arm terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah operating in the Gaza Strip and Southern Lebanon with weapons smuggled via the sea. These attempts are those publicly made available and are not a comprehensive account of every smuggling attempt made by sea. They highlight the need for comprehensive security checks for all vessels approaching the Gaza Strip and for other vessels suspected to be carrying weapons to terrorist groups in the region.
Three crew members aboard the Santorini were convicted for trying to smuggle weapons from Lebanon to the Gaza Strip—the captain, a professional weapons smuggler and two of his relatives aboard the ships had been involved in three previous smuggling attempts backed by Hezbollah and the PFLP-GC.
The Santorini ship was acquired by the PFLP-GC in a small island off Syria, and registered as Syrian. During previous smuggling attempts by the crew, arms were packed in Syria and transferred to Lebanon by a Syrian bus. Part of the anti-tank weaponry originated from Iran.
The Palestinian Authority was heavily involved in the smuggling attempt, especially Yasser Arafat’s former Chief Financial Officer and confidante at the time, Fuad Shubaki. The crew of the Karin-A also included senior members of the P.A . , indicating Arafat’s direct involvement. The ship was purchased in Lebanon and sailed to Sudan and Yemen to pick up civilian goods (watermelon seeds, sesame seeds, rice, toys, and clothes) to disguise the weapons aboard.
Weapons found aboard the Santorini
May 7th, 2001: Santorini
The Santorini was intercepted on its way from Lebanon to the Gaza Strip. It contained a large shipment of 40 tons of weapons including Strela anti-aircraft missiles—the same kind that terrorists fired at and narrowly missed an Arkia Israeli passenger jet taking off from Mombassa, Kenya in November 2002. The shipment also included mortars, rifles and guns, grenades, mines and explosive material, anti-tank RPG-7 missile-launchers, and artillery rockets.Three crew members aboard the Santorini were convicted for trying to smuggle weapons from Lebanon to the Gaza Strip—the captain, a professional weapons smuggler and two of his relatives aboard the ships had been involved in three previous smuggling attempts backed by Hezbollah and the PFLP-GC.
The Santorini ship was acquired by the PFLP-GC in a small island off Syria, and registered as Syrian. During previous smuggling attempts by the crew, arms were packed in Syria and transferred to Lebanon by a Syrian bus. Part of the anti-tank weaponry originated from Iran.
50 tons of weapons captured aboard the Karin-A
January 3rd, 2002: Karin-A
The Karin-A was intercepted in the Red Sea, heading towards the Palestinian Authority in the Gaza Strip. It carried 80 submersible containers containing 50 tons of weapons, including: RPG-7 rockets, RPG-18 anti-tank rocket launchers, Iranian-made anti-tank and anti-personnel mines, 2200 kilograms of high explosive demolition blocks, Sagger anti-tank launchers and missiles, as well as rifles, machine guns, AK-47s, 735 hand grenades, 700,000 rounds of small ammunition, and diving equipment. The submergible containers were to be dropped into the sea and then washed ashore to the Gaza Strip or picked up by a smaller vessel and delivered to the Strip.The Palestinian Authority was heavily involved in the smuggling attempt, especially Yasser Arafat’s former Chief Financial Officer and confidante at the time, Fuad Shubaki. The crew of the Karin-A also included senior members of the P.A . , indicating Arafat’s direct involvement. The ship was purchased in Lebanon and sailed to Sudan and Yemen to pick up civilian goods (watermelon seeds, sesame seeds, rice, toys, and clothes) to disguise the weapons aboard.
June 8th, 2002
Two Palestinians were found swimming along the northern Gaza Strip shore armed with four grenades, an AK-47, and four ammunition magazines in an attempt to infiltrate an Israeli communityAugust 4th, 2002
IDF naval forces identified an armed Palestinian wearing a oxygenated scuba diving suit and carrying an AK-47, 8 grenades, 4 ammunition magazines, who was on his way towards an Israeli community from the Gaza coast.November 23rd, 2002
After many attempts to communicate with an unknown Palestinian fishing boat heading from the Gaza Strip towards the direction of Israel, the bomb-laden boat exploded near an Israeli security patrol boat, moderately injuring three and lightly injuring one.January 7th, 2003
A suspicious life raft found floating along the northern Gaza Strip coast was found to be booby-trapped with explosives. Radio activation systems found aboard the Abu Hassan
May 21st, 2003: Abu Hasan
The “Abu Hasan”, intercepted in waters west of Haifa, was sailing from Lebanon to Egypt carrying a Hezbollah operative specializing in explosives bound for the Gaza Strip. The boat itself was a fishing boat, used purposefully to disguise its intentions. Cargo contained: a radio-activation system to detonate bombs remotely, CDs of directives on how to carry out suicide bomb terror attacks, five boxes with rocket fuses, and 25 Katyusha rocket detonators. The masterminds of the arms smuggling attempt were connected to Arafat’s Palestinian Authority and Hezbollah.May 9th, 2006
Early in the morning of Israel’s Independence Day, the Israeli Navy spotted a suspicious vessel crossing from Egypt into the southern Gaza Strip. After ignoring repeated warnings issued by the Navy, the Navy opened fire towards the vessel, whose crew then steered the boat to hide behind a Palestinian civilian boat. The crew was then spotted to be tossing large sacks off the vessel into the water. The Navy ceased fire out of concern that the Palestinian civilian boat would be hit, and the suspicious vessel escaped. The large sacks tossed overboard were later found by an underwater robot to contain over 500 kilograms of explosives.May 14th, 2006
The Israeli Navy spotted a suspicious Palestinian vessel off the coast of the southern Gaza Strip and issued warnings ordering the crew to stop the vessel. Upon receiving the warnings, the crew began to toss large bags off the ship into the water. The Navy apprehended the vessel and detained the crew for questioning. The bags were later found to contain several hundred kilograms of explosives. The Hansa India
October 12th, 2009: Hansa India
The “Hansa India”, which was charted by and sailed from Iran, was due to unload a cargo of eight containers in Egypt where it was believed to continue on to Syria or Lebanon. Following warnings from the German authorities, the vessel was not unloaded and continued to Malta where it was seized by the US military and found to be carrying bullets and industrial material intended for the production of weapons, seemingly bound for the Syrian army or Hezbollah.Sunday, July 3, 2011
Weightlifter wins her fight to wear the hijab in competition as international body bows to pressure for rule change
By Daily Mail Reporter
Kulsoom Abdullah has won her battle to wear the hijab while competing.
After a lengthy campaign to change the sport's rules surrounding what athletes can wear in competition, the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) have now approved new guidelines to give women the option of covering their arms and legs.
And under the new advice female competitors who wish to cover up can wear a one-piece full-body unitard signalling a massive victory for the Georgia Tech graduate.
The 35-year-old, who holds a PhD in computer engineering, has waged a personal crusade with both the U.S. Olympic Committee and USA Weighlifting to push reform of the uniform law.
It was the USOC that urged the IWF to make the change during a meeting in Malaysia earlier this week.
Now Abdullah, who competes in the women's senior weightlifting division, can enter national competitions after she was barred because she insisted on covering most of her body, as her religion dictates.
She said: 'I’m really happy that it happened. I’m really thankful for the support that was out there in the public.
'The one advantage to all of this is that it raised a lot of awareness. I hope it [the changes] will help with other sports that other [Muslim] women participate in.
'I think it would just be nice that in any sport, if there's a lady who covers her arms and legs - they could still be involved.'
The Atlanta woman had argued her case before the USOC and provided a video which showed alternative attire that a Muslim woman could wear.
The IWF said issues similar to those raised by Abdullah had been circulating within the sport's governing body.
IWF President Tamas Ajan said: 'This rule modification has been considered in the spirit of fairness, equality and inclusion.'
Abdullah said she will begin training and will register for an upcoming Iowa weightlifting competition she thought she would not be able to enter.
Born in the U.S. to Pakistani parents, Abdullah competes in the 48kg (about 106 pounds) and 53kg (about 117 pounds) weight class.
She began weightlifting as an exercise routine a few years ago and said: 'It was just something for fun. It gave me something to achieve as a goal.'
She then teamed up with a trainer and set her sights on competing, training five to six days a week and entering competitions last year in Flowery Branch, Newnan, Gainesville, Savannah and South Carolina.
Abdullah, who moved to Atlanta from Florida in 1999, said she covered her body during local competitions and met no resistance from local weightlifting officials.
A spokesman for the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations added: 'We welcome this important decision in support of greater inclusion in athletic competition and urge the representatives of other international bodies to take similar steps.
'We thank the United States Olympic Committee for helping to empower Muslim women athletes and for taking a stand in support of the American tradition of religious diversity.'
Abdullah is among other female athletes who are Muslim and have been blocked from national and international competition because of their insistance on modest dress.
Iran's women's soccer team was recently disqualified during an Olympic qualifying competition against Jordan after athletes wore a full-body outfit with a head scarf.
As a result, they will not be allowed to compete in London.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010277/Muslim-weightlifter-Kulsoom-Abdullah-wins-fight-wear-hijab-competition.html#ixzz1R3tJllIS
Kulsoom Abdullah has won her battle to wear the hijab while competing.
After a lengthy campaign to change the sport's rules surrounding what athletes can wear in competition, the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) have now approved new guidelines to give women the option of covering their arms and legs.
And under the new advice female competitors who wish to cover up can wear a one-piece full-body unitard signalling a massive victory for the Georgia Tech graduate.
Weighing in: Kulsoom Abdullah appeared on NBC News Atlanta to discuss the historic
victory to convince the International Weightlifting Federation to change it's dress code
It was the USOC that urged the IWF to make the change during a meeting in Malaysia earlier this week.
Now Abdullah, who competes in the women's senior weightlifting division, can enter national competitions after she was barred because she insisted on covering most of her body, as her religion dictates.
Weighty issue: Kulsoom Abdullah sets up her weights, she has persuaded the
international weightlifting body to change its dress code for women
Weight lifted: Kulsoom Abdullah will now be able to compete after rules over what she
can wear in competition have been changed to allow her to cover up
'The one advantage to all of this is that it raised a lot of awareness. I hope it [the changes] will help with other sports that other [Muslim] women participate in.
'I think it would just be nice that in any sport, if there's a lady who covers her arms and legs - they could still be involved.'
The Atlanta woman had argued her case before the USOC and provided a video which showed alternative attire that a Muslim woman could wear.
The IWF said issues similar to those raised by Abdullah had been circulating within the sport's governing body.
IWF President Tamas Ajan said: 'This rule modification has been considered in the spirit of fairness, equality and inclusion.'
Abdullah said she will begin training and will register for an upcoming Iowa weightlifting competition she thought she would not be able to enter.
Born in the U.S. to Pakistani parents, Abdullah competes in the 48kg (about 106 pounds) and 53kg (about 117 pounds) weight class.
She began weightlifting as an exercise routine a few years ago and said: 'It was just something for fun. It gave me something to achieve as a goal.'
She then teamed up with a trainer and set her sights on competing, training five to six days a week and entering competitions last year in Flowery Branch, Newnan, Gainesville, Savannah and South Carolina.
Abdullah, who moved to Atlanta from Florida in 1999, said she covered her body during local competitions and met no resistance from local weightlifting officials.
A spokesman for the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations added: 'We welcome this important decision in support of greater inclusion in athletic competition and urge the representatives of other international bodies to take similar steps.
'We thank the United States Olympic Committee for helping to empower Muslim women athletes and for taking a stand in support of the American tradition of religious diversity.'
Abdullah is among other female athletes who are Muslim and have been blocked from national and international competition because of their insistance on modest dress.
Iran's women's soccer team was recently disqualified during an Olympic qualifying competition against Jordan after athletes wore a full-body outfit with a head scarf.
As a result, they will not be allowed to compete in London.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010277/Muslim-weightlifter-Kulsoom-Abdullah-wins-fight-wear-hijab-competition.html#ixzz1R3tJllIS
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)