Wednesday, 18 April 2007

LYING FOR CORZINE

Ken Berwitz

Read this, and think about what the media would be saying - make that screaming - if this were a Republican administration:-

Account Changes in N.J. Gov. Crash

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

(04-18) 14:59 PDT Trenton, N.J. (AP) --

It was an ominous tale an erratic driver in a red pickup racing wildly along the nation's busiest toll road sends the governor's sport utility vehicle careening into a guard rail.

But that story, relayed hours after Gov. Jon S. Corzine was critically injured, has been debunked by a new state police report detailing how his driver was dashing with emergency lights flashing at 91 mph in a 65 mph zone. The alleged erratic driver wasn't a villain but a young man trying to get out of the way of the governor's onrushing SUV.

Corzine's driver, State Trooper Robert Rasinski, 34, has also come under scrutiny for allowing the governor to ride without a seat belt, a violation of state law. Corzine remained in critical condition on a ventilator Wednesday with 11 broken ribs and a severely broken leg; Rasinski wore a seat belt and walked away from the crash.-

I certainly don't blame Jon Corzine for the lies and the coverup.  He's lucky to be alive altogether.

But I do blame him for the fact that his vehicle was going 91 miles per hour in a 65 zone (there is no way in the world the driver did that without being told to) and for being in the front seat without a seat belt because he gives his staff hell every time they try to get him to wear one.

And let's not forget that this also would have hung a young man out to dry for doing nothing other than trying to get out of the way.  Not only did the insane driving put him in mortal danger, but the lies and coverup would have literally ruined his life.  How sick is that? 

I'm sorry that Mr. Corzine is so seriously injured and wish him as complete a recovery as possible.  But I combine that with another wish:  that he will start acting like he's a human being like us, not one of the ubermenschen who can do whatever the hell they want without ramifications. 

Maybe if media treated the Corzine incident the way they would have for, say, Gingrich or Rumsfeld or Bush, it would be a start.

Marc I guess you have to look at where he was rushing to get to, and what could be more important then that. RIGHT..... (04/19/07)

NJguy Corzine bought the senate and bought the governor job. He should try to buy his health back from god. (04/19/07)

ca THIS WAS ANOTHER ATTEMPT TO COVER THINGS UP AND BLAME AN INNOCENT MAN TO PROTECT A PERSON OF IMPORTANT STATUS. WE ALL NEED TO THANK THE PEOPLE THAT HAVE COME FORWARD WITH THE TRUTH. (04/19/07)


THE 'FLYING IMAMS', CAIR, AND TERRORISM

Ken Berwitz

Here is a riveting article by Patrick Poole of www.frontpagemagazine.com.  It talks about how CAIR abets the type of people we should fear in this country - whether terrorists in training or the "flying imams" (personally, I think of them as the "fraudulent imams").  See what you think:

The Flying Imams and 9/11

It's a tale of two Novembers with the horror of September 11th sandwiched in between.

In November 2006, six imams on a US Airways Minneapolis to Phoenix flight begin engaging in bizarre behaviors eerily similar to those used by the 9/11 hijackers to takeover the planes used on that terrible day: shouting slogans in Arabic; leaving assigned seats to position themselves much like the 9/11 attackers; requesting seat belt extenders that they positioned on the floor, rather than used to secure themselves. Responding to the reasonable concerns of passengers and the flight crew, the imams were removed from the plane by authorities.

Seven years earlier in November 1999, two Saudi students on an America West flight from Phoenix to Columbus were detained after landing because they had made repeated attempts to enter the cockpit area of the plane during the flight.

In both cases, CAIR rose up to defend the offenders in question and engaged in their now standard grievance theater protest politics. In the most recent case, CAIR has tried to capitalize on the publicity surrounding the incident by backing the "Flying Imams" and supporting their lawsuit against the airlines and passengers for responding to their bizarre behavior. The lawsuit is being handled by a Muslim attorney associated with CAIR.

When it comes to the November 1999 incident, any mention of CAIR's involvement or defense of the Saudi students has been scrubbed from the organization's website. It's no wonder, as the 9/11 Commission Report (page 521, footnote 60) explains that the FBI now considers the incident as a "dry run" for the 9/11 hijackings. And the two men involved? As the 9/11 Commission Report explains, Hamdan al-Shalawi was in Afghanistan in November 2000 training at an Al-Qaeda camp to launch "Khobar Tower"-type attacks against the US in Saudi Arabia, and Mohammad Al-Qadhaieen was arrested in June 2003 as a material witness in the 9/11 attacks. Both men were friends of Al-Qaeda recruiter, Zakaria Mustapha Soubra, who drove them to the airport that day in Qadhaieen's car. Another friend of Shalawi is Ghassan al-Sharbi, another Al-Qaeda operative that would later be captured in Pakistan with high-level Al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida.

There is a connection between these two incidents, as the leader of the six "Flying Imams" this past November is none other than Omar Shahin, the former imam of the Islamic Center of Tucson, where the two Saudi students from the November 1999 incident attended. Counterterrorism expert Rita Katz told the Washington Post in September 2002 that the mosque served as "basically the first cell of Al-Qaeda in the United States; that is where it all started". (Len Sherman's Arizona Monthly November 2004 article, "Al Qaeda among Us", provides greater detail about the connections between the Saudi pair involved in the November 1999 event and the Al-Qaeda cell that operated in Tucson and Phoenix.)

Their current silence and website purge notwithstanding, immediately after the November 1999 "dry run", CAIR was not shy about publicly speaking on the incident. "It seems like they single out some individuals because of their name, the way they look or their national origin," huffed current CAIR National Vice Chairman Ahmad Al-Akhras (who was then president of the CAIR Ohio chapter) in an interview with the Egyptian daily, Al-Ahram. That same article quoted Nihad Awad, Executive Director and Co-Founder of CAIR, who explained, "the hysteria around [the crash of] EgyptAir [Flight 990] has created a negative atmosphere that leads to such incidents."

CAIR not only gave indirect support to the 9/11 "dry run" hijackers by launching an aggressive media defense and circulating their woeful tale of innocents victimized by the bigotry of non-Muslims, but as Katherine Kersten of the Minneapolis Star Tribune reminds us, in 2000 CAIR fronted a lawsuit for Shalawi and Qadhaieen against America West by hiring attorneys and calling for a boycott of the airline as a result of the incident. Again, two identical events eight years apart with CAIR playing the exact same role.

CAIR was unsuccessful in the lawsuit stemming from the November 1999 9/11 "dry run", as the judge quickly dismissed the case, but they did succeed in creating an atmosphere of intimidation that was certainly aimed at stopping airline passengers from speaking up about suspicious behavior. Did CAIR's campaign of intimidation silence any of the passengers aboard United Airlines Flight 175, American Airlines Flight 11, American Airlines Flight 77, or United Airlines Flight 93 who might have witnessed suspicious behavior of the 9/11 hijackers that day? Since all the passengers of those flights were silenced forever, we will never know.

But the horrific consequences of their previous defense of the 9/11 "dry run" has not prevented CAIR from using the exact same tactics and rhetoric in the current "Flying Imams" case. As Janet Levy recently explained in an article here at FrontPage ("The Minneapolis Six Sabotage Airline Security"), the CAIR-backed lawsuit by the six imams is being used as a propaganda device to advance CAIR's legislative agenda for the passage of a bill through Congress that would prevent authorities from acting on suspicious behavior, much like what was seen in the November 1999 and November 2006 incidents, as well as 9/11.

As their current protest politics in the "Flying Imams" case demonstrates, CAIR shows no remorse for their complicity in providing cover for the 9/11 "dry run" operatives, though the purge of their website of any mention of their participation was clearly an attempt to try to wipe the public record clean of their involvement. But in light of their past actions and with their pursuit of the current lawsuit, it seems fair to ask: will thousands more Americans need to be murdered before CAIR brings the curtain down on their grievance theater road show? Tragically, we might have the opportunity to find out.


GUN CONTROL AND VIRGINIA TECH

Ken Berwitz

Let me start with a bit of disclosure: 

----   I do not own a gun, I have never owned a gun and I don't aspire to own a gun.  I abhor violence;

----   I believe in licensing of handguns;

----   I believe in mandatory tagging/identification of all ammunition;

----   I believe that anyone who wants to buy a gun must be subjected to a stringent background check, to demonstrate that he/she is not a clear risk to public safety (e.g. no violent or criminal background, etc.). 

----   I believe that there should be a mandatory sentence of no less than 3 years (I prefer 5 or more) for anyone who commits any crime while illegally possessing a gun - regardless of whether the gun is actually used in that crime. 

That said, I have a number of other beliefs about guns, not one of which is inconsistent with what has been enumerated above:

----   I think much of the gun control legislation being proposed (usually with the best of intentions) is not only useless as a deterrent but, in fact, will increase gun crimes;

----   I believe that when responsible people are legally able to own guns they become a deterrent to those who intend to use them illegally;

----   I believe that if one or more such people were present when Cho Seung Hui was indiscriminately shooting dozens of Virginia Tech students and professors, there might have been dramatically fewer casualties.

----   I believe that making poignant statements about how terrible the Virginia Tech horror was, complete with teary-eyed friends and relatives anguishing over their loss, is NO SUBSTITUTE for aggressive prevention of the killings themselves.  It may make a lot of Today and GMA viewers feel warm inside, but won't bring back even one victim.

Let's talk honestly here:  If  Cho Seung Hui did not proactively intend to go on his killing rampage at Virginia Tech, the guns he purchased could have been in his pocket all day and no one would have been shot.  Not one person. 

Further, if Hui intended to shoot people but was unable to purchase guns legally, he would have purchased them illegally.  Gun control laws do not prevent gun ownership, they make it a little more inconvenient and expensive.

Here are a couple of slogans that you always hear from 2nd Amendment (right to bear arms) supporters:

-Guns don't kill people, people kill people;

-If you make it a crime to own guns, only criminals will have them.

The fact is, both slogans are absolutely correct.  Guns DON'T kill people.  And if you outlaw legal ownership of guns for demonstrably responsible people, the only people walking the streets with guns will be the ones who use them illegally.  That makes law abiding citizens nothing more than a bunch of sitting ducks.

I will end this commentary by making an offer to anyone who disputes that it is people who kill, not guns:   

I will pay $10,000 to anyone who can provide the make and model number of a gun that jumps up, aims at a potential victim and shoots by itself.

This, folks, is the safest $10,000 I own.

 

Judy Hauser I agree with Ken Berwitz's comments regarding rational gun laws. However, my comments revolve around a complete *meltdown* of our mental health system especially in Virginia. It seems you can purchase a gun in Virginia in 10 minutes with no waiting period. So I can purchase a gun in less time it takes to obtain a cup of coffee at Starbuck's. In addition, someone must tell me how a person who is suicidal is placed on a mental health legal hold in the State of Virginia as a OUTPATIENT????? This is absolutely convoluted......As with gun laws, we have at least 50 versions as a State issue, we have 50 different mental health state laws. Are laws so relaxed in Virginia that you can purchase a gun in 10 minutes, threaten to either kill yourself or someone else and *escape* the whole legal system as an outpatient? (04/19/07)


ANOTHER TASTE OF THE FUTURE (PART 7)

Ken Berwitz

Here is another taste of the "culture" we risk living under if we don't fight radical islamic terrorism.  Bold print is mine:

-

ISTANBUL, Turkey - Assailants tied up three people at a publishing house that distributes Bibles in Turkey and then slit their throats Wednesday, adding to a string of attacks apparently targeting the countrys tiny Christian minority.

The killings occurred in Malatya, a city in central Turkey known as a hotbed of Turkish nationalism and is the hometown of Mehmet Ali Agca, the gunman who tried to assassinate Pope John Paul II in 1981.

Malatya Gov. Ibrahim Dasoz said two of the victims at the Zirve publishing house were found already dead and the third died after being taken to the hospital. All had their throats cut and their hands and legs were bound, he said.

Dasoz said police detained four suspects and were investigating whether another man who suffered head injuries when he jumped from the window of the publishers office may have been involved in the attack. He was reported undergoing surgery for his injury.

The German Embassy said one victim was German. I am shocked that a German citizen is among the victims. Even if the exact circumstances of the crime are not yet known, I most strongly condemn this brutal crime, German Ambassador Eckart Cuntz said in a statement.

Another victim was Turkish, Dasoz said, but he could not confirm the nationality of the third person killed.

Employees had been threatened
Zirves general manager told CNN-Turk television that his employees had recently been threatened. We know that they have been receiving some threats, Hamza Ozant said, but could not say who made the threats.

The publishing house had been targeted previously in protests by nationalists who accused it of proselytizing in this overwhelmingly Muslim but officially secular country, Dogan news agency reported.

Making up less than 1 percent of Turkeys 70 million people, Christians have increasingly become targets amid what some fear is a rising tide of hostility toward non-Muslims.

In February 2006, a teenager fatally shot a Catholic priest as he prayed in his church, and two more Catholic priests were attacked later in the year. A November visit by Pope Benedict XVI was greeted by nonviolent protests, and early this year a gunman killed Armenian Christian editor Hrant Dink.

-

I've said it before and I'll say it again:  This what will replace western civilization if we allow it to.  And it will be the way YOU live.

If we fight against radical Islam we may win and we may lose.  If we do not, we will most assuredly lose because, either way, they will continue fighting.  And if they win, our culture and our civilization is over, to be replaced by what?  The love, tolerance and freedom you just read about?

We play political games with the war against terrorism at our own peril.


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!