Friday, 21 September 2007
You don't need an explanation of why I'm calling this imbecile an
imbecile. Here, courtesy of WBZTV/Boston, is the story:.
MIT Student Arrested For Fake Bomb At
(WBZ) BOSTON A woman who
walked into Logan International Airport allegedly wearing a fake bomb strapped
to chest was arrested at gunpoint Friday, officials
Simpson, 19, had a computer
circuit board, wiring and a putty that later turned out to be Play-Doh in plain
view over a black hooded sweatshirt she was wearing, said State Police Maj.
Scott Pare, the commanding officer at the airport.
After a Massachusetts
Port Authority official notified State Police about 8 a.m., troopers tracked
Simpson down outside Terminal C, where they arrested her and later determined
the device was a fake.
"She's extremely lucky she followed the
instructions or deadly force would have been used," Pare told The Associated
Press. "And she's lucky to be in a cell as opposed to the
Simpson is a Massachusetts Institute of Technology sophomore
from Hawaii, officials said.
Pare said authorities had not determined a
motive. Simpson was to be arraigned in East Boston District Court later in the
day. She's charged with disturbing the peace and possessing a hoax
A Massport staffer manning an information booth in the terminal,
home to United Airlines, Jet Blue and other carriers, became suspicious when
Simpson -- wearing the device -- approached to ask about an incoming flight,
Pare said. Simpson then walked out of the terminal and the information booth
attendant notified a nearby trooper.
The trooper, joined by others with
submachine guns, confronted her at a traffic island in front of the
Pare said Simpson took an MBTA subway to the airport, but he
was not sure if she had the device on at that time. She was arrested near an
area where shuttle buses arrive to take passengers back to the airport subway
"She was allegedly picking somebody up," said Pare.
major praised the booth attendant but said the incident is a reminder of the
terrorism threat confronting the civil aviation system. Two passenger jets were
hijacked from Logan on Sept. 11, 2001, and later flown into the World Trade
Center as part of a broader terrorist attack that crashed other jets into the
Pentagon and a field in Pennsylvania.
Nearly 3,000 died in the attack,
and Logan has since become a model and test bed for many aviation security
"In this day and age, the threat continues to be there," said
Pare. "She certainly jeopardized her own safety by bringing this to the airport,
as well as the safety of everybody around her."
A spokeswoman for MIT had
no immediate comment. .
Can you believe someone smart enough to get into MIT is this big an
License to kill? License revoked. Iraqi's want PRIVATE contractors OUT
How much more can we take? Private contractors in Iraqi are IMMUNE
from anything. They can kill, rape and do whatever they want with full
immunity. Iraqi government wants all of them out of the country and wants
the immunity, which the Bush administration and it's friends the Private
Contractors passed in 2004 to be revoked. Read on
License to Kill? License Revoked.
Yesterday, the Interior Ministry of Iraq announced that it was revoking the license of Blackwater USA, a private American
company that provides security to government and private officials in Iraq
such as Amb. Ryan Crocker. Employees of the firm were involved in Baghdad
shootout that killed at least nine civilians,
including a mother and her child. Details of the shootout are murky. The
shooting began after a car bomb exploded near a State Department motorcade
in central Baghdad. Blackwater and U.S. officials say the security
contractors then exchanged fire with armed attackers, but
"three people who claimed to have witnessed the shooting" told McClatchy
that "only the Blackwater guards were firing."
Regardless, the incident has sent shockwaves through Iraq. "We have
canceled the license of Blackwater and prevented them from working all over Iraqi
territory," said Interior Ministry spokesman
Abdul-Karim Khalaf. "We will also refer those involved to Iraqi judicial
authorities." A senior Iraqi official, however, told Time that "as far as
the license being permanently revoked, 'it's not a done deal yet.'"
Additionally, it is unlikely that Iraqi courts would have the legal
ability to hold the contractors accountable. While
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Iraqi Prime Minister Mouri
al-Maliki yesterday to offer condolences and the promise of a "fair and transparent investigation," one
American official in Baghdad told The New York Times that "this incident
will be the true test of diplomacy between the
State Department and the government of Iraq."
THE FALLOUT: Approximately 1,000 Blackwater employees are currently
operating in Iraq. If the Iraqi
government is able to successfully kick Blackwater out of the country, the
move would deal "a blow to U.S. government operations in
Iraq by stripping" many "diplomats, engineers,
reconstruction officials and others of their security protection." "There
is simply no way at all that the State Department's Bureau of Diplomatic
Security could ever have enough full-time personnel to staff the security
function in Iraq. There is no alternative except through
contracts," said Crocker in his Senate testimony last
week. The Iraqi government has also said that it will "review the status of all private security firms operating in
the country" to "determine whether such contractors
were operating in compliance with Iraqi law." The total number of private
contractors in Iraq is estimated between 126,000 and 180,000, which includes 20,000 to 50,000 private security
guards. The expulsion of Blackwater from Iraq would be a boon for Iraqi
politicians as "newspapers in Iraq on Tuesday trumpeted the government's
decision." Maliki is expected to "gain political
capital from the move against unpopular foreign security contractors"
while the national government as a whole would be given a political "boost."
PRIVATE CONTRACTOR'S DARK PAST: "Visible,
aggressive" private contractors have "angered many Iraqis, who consider
them a mercenary force that runs roughshod over
people in their own country." At Abu Ghraib, "the U.S.
Army found that contractors were involved in 36 percent of proven abuse incidents,"
but "not a single private contractor named in the Army's investigation
report has been charged, prosecuted or punished." Though many other
private security firms are operating in Iraq, Blackwater is perhaps the
most visible. On March 31, 2004, four contractors working for Blackwater were brutally
killed in Fallujah. After images of their mutilated
bodies were shown hanging from a bridge, the American military laid siege
to the city, resulting in some of the most intense fighting of the
war. In Dec. 2006, a Blackwater employee allegedly drunkenly killed a guard for the Iraqi
Vice President. Instead of being held accountable in Iraq, the contractor
was smuggled out of the country and fired by
the company. This past May, "Blackwater guards were involved in shooting incidents on consecutive
days in Baghdad." In total, Interior Ministry
officials say they have "received reports of at least a half-dozen
incidents in which Blackwater guards allegedly shot civilians, far more
than any other company."
AREA: "A Blackwater employee is not going to be subject to Iraqi
courts," says Scott Silliman, director of the Center
on Law, Ethics, and National Security at Duke University. The day before
the Coalition Provisional Authority ceased to exist, L. Paul Bremer, the
chief American envoy in Iraq, issued CPA Order
17, which "granted American private security
contractors immunity from prosecution in Iraqi
courts." Though "the Iraqi government has contested the continued application of this
order," they are restrained from "changing or revoking
CPA orders," so the order is still in effect. It is unclear what U.S. laws
would govern the actions of private security contractors operating in a
foreign country. Though "uniformed military personnel are subject to the
Uniform Code of Military Justice, and 'persons serving with or
accompanying an armed force in the field' are technically subject as
well," the application of the UCMJ to these private contractors would likely face constitutional challenges.
The Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act of
2000 covers civilians working for the Department of
Defense, but even this would be insufficient to cover Blackwater employees
involved in Sunday's shootout, since they are actually employed by the State
CONGRESS NEEDS TO ACT: Yesterday, House
Oversight Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) announced that "the Oversight
Committee will be holding hearings to understand what has
happened and the extent of the damage to U.S. security
interests." In addition to investigating this specific incident, action
needs to be taken that explicitly clarifies what laws govern private
contractors and how they can officially be held accountable for their
actions. In fall 2006, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) added a clause to the
2007 Defense bill that "changed the law defining UCMJ to cover civilians not just in times of declared war but also
contingency operations." But "no Pentagon guidance has
been issued on how this clause might be used by JAGs in the field."
Graham's clause also didn't not extend to contractors not
working for the Defense Department. Rep. David E. Price (D-NC) "has
proposed legislation that would make all contractors, whether they work
for the State Department or the Defense Department, to be subject to prosecution under U.S.
ETHICS -- INVESTIGATION INTO
ROVE'S CORRUPTION IN JEOPARDY DUE TO FUNDING: In April,
the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) launched a six-member task force
examining "the firing of at least one U.S. attorney, missing White
House e-mails, and White House efforts to keep presidential
appointees attuned to Republican political priorities." The probe --
the most "broad and high-profile inquiry" in the OSC's history --
focused on the activities of Karl Rove and White House political
operations that allegedly violated the Hatch Act, which bars
federal officials from partisan political activity while on the job.
Scott Bloch, head of the OSC, began the investigation promising
to "leave no stone unturned," but has
now gone over budget. "Without a
last-minute infusion of nearly $3 million, the special task force may be unable to pay its
staff and buy the kind of technical assistance
it needs." The office Bloch heads is actually "a White House office,
and the House of Representatives apparently told Bloch to go ask for the extra money from the White
ENVIRONMENT -- IPCC: GLOBAL
WARMING BEING FELT 'ON EVERY CONTINENT,' 'SOONER THAN EXPECTED':
A new report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change concludes that "hundreds of millions of people in
developing nations will face natural disasters, water shortages and
hunger" due to climate change. The report warned that global
warming's effects are already being felt "on every continent, and
sooner than expected." "Professor Martin Parry, who chairs the
working group, said today that he was pessimistic about the chances
of keeping the increase in global average temperatures below 2C,"
which would severely damage the environment. "Africa will be one of the areas worst
hit" by climate change; by 2020, "the report
warns, up to 250 million Africans may be left
short of water, while access to sufficient food is 'projected to be
severely compromised by climate variability and change.'" Coinciding
with last month being the "second warmest August on record,"
the IPCC stated that "[d]eveloped regions like the US and southern
Europe are likely to experience more severe summer
CONGRESS -- SENATORS REINTRODUCE HABEAS
CORPUS RESTORATION ACT: Yesterday, Sens. Chris Dodd (D-CT)
and Patrick Leahy (D-VT) reintroduced the Habeas Corpus Restoration
Act as an amendment to the defense authorization
bill. The act would restore the right of habeas corpus to so-called
enemy combatants, which was stripped by last year's Military Commissions
Act. "I take a back seat to no one, when it
comes to defending our national security. ... But there is a right way and a wrong way to win the
fight we are in," Dodd said. Though the bill
enjoys bipartisan support, some
conservatives are determined to fight the measure. Sen. Jeff
Sessions (R-AL) explained yesterday that "we don't allow enemy
combatants to continue their war against us through the judiciary,
through litigation." As the New York Times wrote, "There is nothing conservative about expressing
contempt for the Constitution by denying
judicial procedure to prisoners who happen not to be
Until recently, just about no one ever heard of Jena, Louisiana other than
its own residents and those of surrounding areas.
But now it is nationally - probably world- famous. All because of
what appears to be a racially inspired attack.
Many of you know some of the facts in this case. But if you are relying
on mainstream media for a complete view, for the full story, you are almost
certainly not getting it. (What a surprise).
Here, courtesy of www.hotair.com, is an
excellent study of the Jena incident, with a number of empirical, easy-to-check
facts that a) are virtually unreported by mainstream venues and b) put a very,
very different face on what happened:.
The notorious Jena case
posted at 11:18 am on September 21, 2007 by Bryan
The Reverends Al and Jesse have once again
parachuted into a small town to throw their weight around and relive the glory
days of the Civil Rights Movement. Perhaps we'll one day get to the point where
the two reverends have become so radioactive that no one will look to them for
any answers on any issue, but we're not yet at that day. The MSM still treats
them as credible, though one
has blood on his hands
and the other is a reverend in name only who has never led a church or even held
down a real job. In a just world, the two reverends from the North would be
mentioned alongside Louisiana's own David Duke among the nations most notorious
racists. Though northern white liberals would have us all think that racism is
exclusively white and exclusively Southern, it's neither.
But back to our story. This time, it's
Jena, Louisiana, which is currently embroiled in a case that is being compared
to the Duke rape case, but in reverse: Six young black men stand accused of
attempted murder for beating a young white man over an incident at the "white
The New York Times reports the sequence of
events as follows .
They called it the White Tree. Not
because of the color of its leaves or tint of its bark, but because of the
kind of people who typically sat beneath its shade here at Jena High
And when a black student tried to defy
that tradition by sitting under the tree last September, it set off a series
of events that have turned this town of 3,000 in central Louisiana's timber
country into a flashpoint over the issue of racial bias in the criminal
Three nooses quickly appeared on the tree
a day after the black student sat under it, and not long afterward, the
authorities said a white student had been beaten by six black schoolmates. The
white student was treated at a local hospital and released; the black students
were charged, not with assault, but with attempted
appropriate accuracy warning) has a useful timeline.
Racial tensions resurfaced in Jena on
September 1, 2006, when hangmans nooses were discovered in an oak tree on the
campus of Jena High School after a black student had asked the vice principal
if he and some friends could sit under the tree, where white students had
typically congregated. The school administration recommended that the
noose-hangers be expelled. The elected La Salle Parish School Board overruled
the school, he and the three white student perpetrators received in-school
suspension. On November 30, 2006, an arson fire destroyed the main
academic building at the school. On December 4, a fight broke out on campus,
after which six African-American students, later dubbed the Jena 6, were
arrested and charged with attempted second-degree
The black kid who sat under the tree showed
courage; the noose hangers showed that racism is unfortunately alive and
But there were three months between the
nooses and the attacks. There are claims that the intervening months were tense
between black and white factions. That's probably true. What's less clear is the
connection between the nooses and the attack. More on that below.
Attempted murder does look like an extreme
charge to level at the six, since the victim was treated and released for his
injuries on the day of the attack. If the six had wanted to murder the victim,
numbers were definitely on their side. What the Times doesn't report, though, is
how the attack occurred or ended. Did the six fight the one after an argument,
and did they get run off by some third parties in the middle of the attack, or
did they plot the attack and slip up on the victim? Well, evidently it was the
latter, according to
There was no "schoolyard fight" as a
result of nooses being hung on a whites-only tree.
Justin Barker, the white victim, was
cold-cocked from behind, knocked unconscious and stomped by six black
athletes. Barker, luckily, sustained no life-threatening injuries and was
released from the hospital three hours after the attack.
Im no lawyer, but if Whitlock's account is
accurate, that's at least aggravated assault. If the attack was broken up by
third parties in a way that prevented further injury to Barker, then yes,
attempted murder would be among the reasonable charges the assailants could
expect to face.
This gives us one important distinction
between Jena and the Duke case: In Jena, the accused actually did something
illegal. The only question is whether they're facing reasonable or extreme
charges, and if the charges are extreme, why that would be the case. The
prosecutors seem to have answered that themselves when they scaled the charges
back to aggravated battery and conspiracy. The conspiracy part goes to the
overall charges' seriousness, though, indicating premeditation as opposed to a
Whitlock goes on to describe how the case
arrived at the point where the Jena Six faced such serious charges.
A black U.S. attorney, Don Washington,
investigated the "Jena Six" case and concluded that the attack on Barker had
absolutely nothing to do with the noose-hanging incident three months before.
The nooses and two off-campus incidents were tied to Barker's assault by
people wanting to gain sympathy for the "Jena Six" in reaction to Walters'
extreme charges of attempted murder.
Much has been written about Bell's trial,
the six-person all-white jury that convicted him of aggravated battery and
conspiracy to commit aggravated battery and the clueless public defender who
called no witnesses and offered no defense. It is rarely mentioned that no
black people responded to the jury summonses and that Bell's public defender
Its almost never mentioned that Bell's
absentee father returned from Dallas and re-entered his son's life only after
Bell faced attempted-murder charges. At a bond hearing in August, Bell's
father and a parade of local ministers promised a judge that they would
supervise Bell if he was released from prison.
So it's not as cut and dried as the
reverends would have the world think. Go figure. Jena is a chance for them to
get back in the spotlight and be relevant again. Jesse and Al need cases like
Now, am I saying that there isn't racial
injustice in America today? No. Of course there is. But again, let's look at the
Duke comparison to understand how things are today. Yes, a black man faces more
scrutiny on average than a white man. But it's also a fact that black men commit
a disproportionate share of crime. And it's also true that an ambitious white DA
can and did charge white men with a crime that they didn't commit in order to
curry favor with the same two reverends who have descended on Jena, among
others, and those reverends convicted the Duke players in the court of public
opinion before the case could even get to trial (which, thanks to the flimsiness
of the evidence, it never got to). Those same reverends haven't apologized for
rushing to judgment against the Duke lacrosse players. They won't apologize for
making a crusade out of Jena either, even while they ignore inconvenient facts
to make their case.
As things stand now, the one of the six who
was convicted on the most serious charges, star athlete Mychal Bell, has had his
conviction thrown out because he was tried as an adult though he was a juvenile
at the time of the attack. He may be re-tried in juvenile court. That's where he
should have been tried to begin with.
By the way, Jason Whitlock, upon whose
reporting I have based much of this post, is black.
If this squares with what you've heard and/or read about Jena you are lucky
indeed. But I have a feeling it doesn't. And I have a feeling the
information being left out of what you're heard and/or read has given you a
wholly different impression of the incident and its aftermath.
Anyway, there it is. Make of it what you will.
THE NEW YORK TIMES COVERS HILLARY'S CAMPAIGN SCANDAL
I don't compliment the Times very often. But my congratulations to them
as they, again, provide front
page partial coverage of hillary clinton's
serial acceptance of dirty money.
Other media are not behaving as responsibly as this, very especially the
broadcast media. So credit where credit is due.
Here is the first part of their story. Bold print is mine:.
Complaint Says Hsu Admitted
Norman Hsu, the Democratic fund-raiser with a habit of fleeing the law,
confessed to F.B.I. agents last week that he had swindled investors in what the
government describes as a multimillion-dollar Ponzi scheme, and acknowledged
pressuring at least some of them to contribute to political campaigns,
prosecutors said in a criminal complaint unsealed yesterday.
The complaint, filed in the Federal District Court
in Manhattan, charges Mr. Hsu with bilking hundreds of investors around the
country out of at least $60 million over the last four years. It says he used
some of that money to reimburse, in violation of election law, at least two
people who, the government says, made a total of $60,000 in campaign donations
at his request.
The complaint does not contend that Mr. Hsu
confessed either to so vast a swindle or to reimbursing the donors. Nor does it
specify which candidates received the illegal or coerced contributions, or who
But the authorities confirmed that one of
the candidates was Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, Democrat of New York, whose presidential campaign
has already said that it intends to return $850,000 to more than 200 people
whose donations were bundled by Mr. Hsu. At a news conference
yesterday, Michael J. Garcia, the United States attorney in Manhattan, said the
Clinton campaign was cooperating in the investigation that led to the new
Mr. Hsu, 56, an apparel industry executive and
major donor to Democratic candidates and causes, is charged with mail fraud,
wire fraud and violating the Federal Election Campaign Act. Conviction on all
counts could bring 45 years in prison.
Mr. Hsu surrendered to the authorities in San
Mateo County, Calif., at the end of August after reports surfaced that he had
been a fugitive in a separate fraud case there for the last 15 years. He was
released on $2 million bail, but a week later fled again. On Sept. 6, while
riding an Amtrak train from California bound for Denver, he fell violently ill.
Taken to a hospital in Grand Junction, Colo., he was eventually arrested there
by federal agents. He agreed not to fight extradition, and was returned to
The new complaint said that while in Colorado, Mr.
Hsu reached out to federal agents on three occasions and asked to speak to them
without his lawyers present. He is said to have told the agents that his
business deals involved no real investments but were in fact fraudulent, and
admitted that he made implied threats to his investors to pressure them to
contribute to political candidates he supported. The threats, the authorities
said, were that Mr. Hsu would cut the investors out of deals that he described
Working through two shell companies, Components
Ltd. and Next Components Ltd., Mr. Hsu persuaded numerous investors from across
the country to give him money, ostensibly to help secure short-term loans for
various companies doing business in the apparel industry, the government said.
Why did I call the coverage partial? Because of what they left out
regarding Hillary Clinton's promise to return the $850,000 of dirty
money amassed for her by hsu. The Times' coverage of how Clinton got to
this point is, shall we say, a bit lacking in detail.
But not to worry. You can get the detail right here:
-First reports were that hsu gave Clinton $23,000;
-Then it was $45,000 with $23,000 coming directly from hsu and the rest from third parties arranged
by him. At that point Ms. Clinton said she would only return the
-Then it ballooned to $850,000 given to Ms. Clinton, who said she
would not simply return it all, she would ask the third party donors
to re-give it, but this time without hsu's involvement.
This, presumably would mean that hsu had no involvement in procuring this
money or literally giving it to the people who then gave it to Clinton;
-Now she's just giving it all back.
How bad does this have to stink before media start doing stories on the
Clinton campaign scandal, maybe even talking about the numerous other people who
are part of this overall scandal?
Evidently it doesn't stink bad enough for most media yet - not even the
Times, which didn't mention any of the above in their article.
From this I conclude that - even when they DO go after you..........it's good
to be a Democrat.
THE DESCENT OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
Last year Jim Gilchrist, who heads the Minutemen - a group attempting to
prevent illegal aliens from ignoring our legal borders - was scheduled to speak
at Columbia University.
The minute he started to do so, the LAMB** crowd, which is in great number at
schools like Columbia, disrupted him - first verbally and then physically.
With all the tolerance of nazi brownshirts, they made sure he never got the
chance to say anything to anyone. Seig heil.
What did Columbia do about it? Nothing, that's what. And
because it did nothing its chancellor, lee bollinger, and the school's
reputation took a huge, eminently well-deserved beating.
Now, fast-forward to this year. Probably
out of shame that this happened, Mr. Gilchrist was again
scheduled to speak at Columbia.
But did he speak? Nope. Why not? Because they cancelled
him. Here are the particulars, courtesy of the New York Sun:.
Gilchrist Speech at
Columbia University Canceled
September 19, 2007
The founder of the
anti-illegal immigration Minuteman Project,
Jim Gilchrist, who
was forced off a Columbia University
stage last year, will not be coming back for a return engagement at the school.
The Columbia Political
Union, a nonpartisan student group that had been planning the forum, said in a
statement on its Web site yesterday that "it has become clear that this event
cannot take the form we had originally hoped it would and could not effectively
accomplish the goals we had hoped it might."
Last October 4, Mr. Gilchrist had to cut short his
talk at the school after students from the Chicano Caucus and
other groups climbed onstage with banners denouncing the Minuteman Project,
which is based in Laguna Hills,
Calif., and advocates
action to prevent illegal immigration from Mexico.
That event was organized by the school's College
Republicans club. The CPU said in its statement that it had envisioned the event
as part of a speaker series, "Friendly Fire," created by Columbia history
lecturer and author, David Eisenbach, who
said he was disappointed by the students' decision. "The health of a free
society and a university depends on the free expression of ideas. Only through a
free expression of ideas can we reach the truth," he said. .
A disgrace? You bet it is. This is the same school that, just two
years ago, honored amiri baraka (formerly LeRoi Jones) -- whose incoherent,
insane hate-soaked "poem" ( "Somebody Blew Up America,") claims that Jews (no
particular ones, just "Jews") knew about 9/11 beforehand and 4,000
"Israeli workers" didn't show up for work at the world trade
center that morning. (Yep, you got it; in the
happy horsemanure world of amiri baraka, every other day there were 4,000 Israeli workers
amiri baraka is good enough to be honored by Columbia, but Jim Gilchrist
isn't good enough to so much as speak there. Twice. That should go a
long way towards explaining the title of this blog.
But now let's go the rest of the way. Who
is invited to speak at Columbia, even as they cancel Mr. Gilchrist?
Why mamoud ahmadinejad, the madman who runs Iran. The one who
is supplying the weapons
that kill US troops in Iraq. The one who supplies hezbollah, which
kills Jews in Israel. The one who is telling us Israel should be wiped off the
face of the earth as he feverishly develops the nuclear weaponry to do it.
THAT'S ok with Columbia:
Read this Associated Press excerpt -- and pay special attention to the last
paragraph, which I've put in bold print:.
Columbia won't cancel Ahmadinejad
Columbia University said it does
not plan to call off a speech by Iran's president despite pressure from critics
including the City Council speaker, who said the Ivy League school was providing
a forum for "hate-mongering vitriol."
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is traveling to New York to
address the United Nations' General Assembly. He was scheduled to appear Monday
at a question-and-answer session with Columbia faculty and students as part of
the school's World Leaders Forum.
City Council speaker Christine Quinn called
Thursday for the university to rescind the invitation, saying "the idea of
Ahmadinejad as an honored guest anywhere in our city is offensive to all New
Quinn said Ahmadinejad was coming to the city "for
one reason to spread his hate-mongering vitriol on the world
Ahmadinejad has called the Holocaust "a myth" and
called for Israel to be destroyed.
His planned appearance at Columbia also was
condemned by Jewish groups including the Jewish Defense Organization, which
described Ahmadinejad as "the Hitler of Iran."
Columbia spokesman Robert Hornsby said Thursday
there was no plan to cancel the appearance, though the university dropped plans
for an Ahmadinejad speech last year because of security and logistical problems.
The decision came after a Jewish activist group expressed outrage over the
Columbia President Lee Bollinger, in
announcing Ahmadinejad's upcoming appearance, described the event as part of
"Columbia's long-standing tradition of serving as a major forum for robust
debate." He said the Iranian president had agreed to answer questions on Israel
and the Holocaust..
Yeah, right. Robust debate as long as you're
facilitating the killing of US troops, along with being an insane Jew-hater who
wants to vaporize Israel. No robust debate if you want to have our border
What happened to Columbia University? When did it descend from a great
center of learning (which it certainly was years ago) into the dungpile it is at
the bottom of now?
**Lunatic-left And Mega-moonbat Brigade
SARKOZY SHOWS THE WAY
In case you're wondering just how different France is, since Nicolas Sarkozy
replaced jerk chirac as its head of state, you might want to read this article
from today's Washington Post.
As usual, the bold print is mine:.
French Plan to Screen DNA of Visa-Seekers Draws
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, September 21, 2007; Page A14
PARIS, Sept. 20 -- The French National
Assembly on Thursday approved a controversial proposal authorizing the use of
DNA testing to determine whether foreigners applying for visas are actually
related to family members they seek to join in France.
The plan, part of President
Sarkozy's efforts to make
it tougher for foreigners from Middle Eastern and African countries to immigrate
to France, prompted outrage from human rights groups, opposition politicians and
some members of the president's cabinet.
The proposal, which also includes
requirements that candidates for immigration be proficient in French and know
the "values of the Republic," is part of a Europe-wide effort to curtail immigration in the face of
growing public concern over the influx of foreigners and angst over the loss of
traditional national identities.
"The parliamentary majority decided to use the
current fear of globalization and nationalist ideas to draw a parallel between
immigrants and cheaters," Dominique Sopo, president of SOS Racisme, one of the
country's leading anti-discrimination groups, said of the vote in the lower
house. "They definitely crossed a moral line."
At a news conference broadcast on national
television, Sarkozy defended the proposed law, saying, "The DNA tests will be
voluntary tests" designed to help officials determine family relations.
Opponents of the proposal said applicants would be
pressured to submit to expensive DNA testing whenever French embassy authorities
questioned the credibility of their birth certificates, marriage licenses and
"People leave ethical considerations aside, saying
that it's a voluntary test, but it's not voluntary," said Claude Huriet, a
former French senator who now serves on UNESCO's International Bioethics Committee.
Thierry Mariani, a member of Parliament
from Sarkozy's ruling right-of-center Union for a Popular
Movement party who
sponsored the legislation, described DNA tests as a "sure and rapid" way to deal
with document fraud.
The proposed law, which is scheduled for debate in
the French Senate next month, would make the testing voluntary until 2010.
Sarkozy campaigned on promises to crack
down on illegal immigration. Brice Hortefeux, his minister for immigration and
national identity, recently chastised local officials who were not meeting
quotas for catching illegal immigrants and sending them back to their homelands,
according to French news reports.
Socialist members of Sarkozy's cabinet, including
Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner, have said they oppose the plan for DNA testing.
During the parliamentary debate, some legislators
said DNA testing could prevent stepchildren and adopted children from joining
their families. Socialist legislator Sandrine Mazetier questioned whether
Sarkozy would be allowed to bring his stepchildren into the country if he were
trying to gain entry for his family under the new rules.
The legislation also includes a
controversial clause that would allow France to collect census data on the
racial and ethnic backgrounds of residents.
France has long maintained that its laws of
equality prohibit it from collecting information on an individual's race or
ethnicity, but some organizations representing minorities complain that the lack
of data serves as a cover for widespread discrimination. .
Hmmmm, let's see: The French government wants to be sure that people applying
for immigration because they are relatives of current legal
residents, actually are relatives. And the government would
also like to know who currently lives in France.
Incidentally, the reason I underlined the word legal (a word not in
the article itself) is that it occurs to me that people who are in France
illegally would not be quick to give their DNA samples. In other
words, this legislation would probably lower the incidence of illegals
bringing in more illegals.
This may be cause for some nutcakes...er, concerned citizens to take to the
streets. But I have a feeling that most French citizens will be pretty
happy with this legislation.
What do you think?
YOM KIPPUR APPROACHES......
Yom kippur is the Jewish high holy day. Despite my love of food, I will
not be eating or drinking from sundown tonight (which is almost here) to after
sundown tomorrow night.
I also will not be blogging.
From Sunday through Wednesday I will have limited opportunities to blog, for
reasons I'll explain afterwards. I hope to put some material up, but
please excuse me if I'm not as prolific as usual.
I promise I'll be back in full fighting form on Thursday.
Best to all, and l'shanah tovah to my Jewish readers.