In the many events of the past week and the “News” stories about them – the one which seems most typical is the collapse of the “Duke Rape Case”. After over a year of slanderous attack by racists and media profiteers and a brutal political assault by one of the most dangerous anomalies in American Jurisprudence, a rogue prosecutor, three innocent men are left to pick up the savaged pieces of their lives. I hear there will be a 60 Minutes appearance, and no doubt there will be much talk generated among talking heads and blogers, but most will miss the point. An agenda driven politician can do great harm to a nation by overt lies and only the truth can stand against such tactics.
It is now obvious that Mike Nifong knew almost from the start that the three student athletes accused by the real criminal in this case, Crystal Gail Mangum, were innocent. It made no difference. Guilt or innocence, rape or racism were never the real motivators in this case. What was really at stake was political power. A multitude of power grubbers jumped in to feed on the carcass of Justice that Nifong’s slaughter of innocence had created. Professional racists like Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton scrambled to be identified with Nifong’s lies. The membership challenged hate group – The Black Panthers – swore violence and mayhem in an attempt to garner gore, and even the professors at Duke University sought to rip off a chunk to bolster their “liberal” credentials, by canonizing with their signatures the lie that casts “white males” as the rapists of the universe.
Panthers, Politicians, Pundants, and Professors all refuse to apologize for their feeding frenzy.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Like a pack of hyenas the media turns to devour its own internals in an attack on Don I’m Ass, the so apply named, most recent victim of racial bias in America, and the lesson of the liars is lost on the witless American masses
46 comments:
Cicero Says:
Very true Lysis...now its time that America hold the "gangsta" rappers and enemies of real African-American culture accountable for their actions. Oh my gosh I just sounded like Bill O'Rielly.
Cicero;
No matter whom you sound like, you are right. What is particularly disconcerting is that the "rappers" not only exploit racial bigotry – they perpetuate, even create, it.
In Brazil there is a law saying that no person or organization can print or propagate publicly any prejudice material. In class we argued about the usefulness of such a law. My first question was "how do you define prejudice material” my teacher answered more or less, "Any thing that favors or encourages discrimination, disparages diversity, or criticizes a group based on race, sex, sexual orientation, ect."
We argued for several minutes about the viability of such a broad definition, "Does the catholic Church discriminate because they don't allow women to become priests?" I asked. She explained that the Catholic Church had so much power that the law could not be enforced in that case and that anyway many do not consider it prejudice because the Catholic Church highly values womanhood an example is the worship of the Virgin Mary.
From this example I pointed out that when a law is so vague and terms so open to interpretation they open the way for the powerful to abuse the laws, or twist the meaning.
Her answer was "I don't know how it is in the U.S. but here in Brazil we do very well with these kinds of ambiguities; they allow us flexibility to examine the justice of a situation on a case by case basis."
In a later discussion I pointed out to the same professor, that the U.S. was justified by international law to use force against Iraq, at this she accused me of twisting the law for my own benefit. Class was getting over so I didn't remind her about "the virtue of ambiguity." maybe next class.
The one nice thing about the recent events (The Duke Case and the Imus firing) is that it has further exposed the hypocrites.
I don't think we are CLOSE to the day where race no longer matters but I DO think we have reached a point where the great majority of Americans can easily identify the hypocrisy of the race baiting. Listening to people like Sharpton attack the use of a relatively archaic and somewhat comical (comical only in it's stupidity) by Imus, then in the same breath defend the use of far more egregious terms by rappers makes him come across as the obvious hypocrite that he is. When I hear Stuart Scott stating that Imus' "nappy headed ho"comment cannot be defended as free speech and accepted as an inappropriate and awkward attempt at humor, but that rap artists that sing about 'niggas', "pimpin bitches" and "slappin up ho's" are simply removing the sting of the comments of whites, not devaluing black women...well...there are SOME that will buy the argument. I suppose. but those that do are simply to embroiled in the argument to see the obvious truth.
Exploitation is exploitation. Until those that defend the use of the language recognize the damage the due to the community and their own credibility, their own words will indict them.
"Imus's wife, Deirdre, tells Newsweek that her husband will be back. "When he's in front of a microphone again, it will be about how to heal the issue of divisiveness and race. That is what's in his heart. No one else will conduct this conversation. No one else would talk about autism and Walter Reed."
And there you have it. Start the carnival music...
Imus only raises the racial spectacle so that he can heal the issue of divisiveness and race. Al Gore has a home that produces 20 times the average Americans carbon output, so that he is the perfect person to speak on excess and correction with carbon credits. John Kerry has 12 mansions, all kept lit and heated year round whether they live there or not, he and his wife keep transportation vehicles running at all times when they are at a home, and this qualifies them to right a book on movie about energy conservation and greenhouse gas emissions. John Travolta and the other Hollywood elitists fly literally hundreds of thousands of private flights each year polluting at the rate of a developing country, but spechify on being green and buying carbon offsets.
Carnival music...and no shortage of clowns...
de de dededede de de duh duh de de dededede de de de de de de de dum
Boy;
I think that the people of this, or any country, are certainly within their rights to refuse to pay for Imus’s radio show by boycotting his sponsors and thus forcing his bosses to reconsider his contract. However, I am thankful that, in the US, the Constitution protects his right to say things that encourage discrimination, disparages diversity, and criticizes groups based on race, sex, sexual orientation, ect. even if he can’t get paid for saying so.
Where the law should intervene is when people lie to gain power or to imprison innocent people to gain fame. We can make these distinctions between words that hurt feelings and lies that destroy based on, as Mindmechanic says, obvious truth, without recourse to ambiguity.
Ah...Pravda...
"American radio icon Don Imus disgraced, fired after threat to reveal 9/11 secrets
In a clear sign of its intent to reign in dissident American media personalities, and their growing influence in American culture, US War Leaders this past week launched an unprecedented attack upon one of their most politically 'connected', and legendary, radio hosts named Don Imus after his threats to release information relating to the September 11, 2001 attacks upon that country.
According to European reports of the events surrounding Don Imus that have gripped the United States this past week, it was during an interview with another American media personality, Tim Russert, who is the host of a television programme frequently used by US War Leaders, wherein while decrying the state of care being given to American War wounded stated, "So those bastards want to keep these boys [in reference to US Soldiers] secret? Let's see how they like it if I start talking about their [in reference to US War Leaders] secrets, starting with 9/11."
Unable to attack such a powerful media figure as Don Imus, directly, the US War Leaders, and as we have seen many times before, resorted to a massive media attack against him using as the reason a racial slur against a US woman's basketball team, but which has been pointed out by other media outlets was not by any means a rare occurrence for the legendary radio icon to make.
But, to the US War Leaders, Don Imus represented the most serious threat, to date, of the growing assault against them by America's media personalities threatening to expose the truths behind the events of September 11, 2001 and the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars; and to such an extent that another American media personality, Rosie O'Donnell, has expressed concern that US Military Leaders could actually imprison Mr. Imus.
From our past research of the tactics used against those threatening America's War Leaders, the likelihood of imprisonment for Don Imus would only occur should he persist in his threats to undermine their authority, and which appears, at this time, unlikely after the public disgrace he has had to endure."
This from the country that has announced a crackdown on the Perestroika democratic movement and recently arrested Putin's opposition.
Lysus...
I agree...PLEASE no new laws on free speech. Americans greatest voice is with their vote and their consuming dollars.
Mindmechanic;
You are right. The lies will only stop when the hypocrites are reveled. Bring in the clowns!
Mindmechanic;
Great quote from Pravda. It looks like the Russians think we all live in the SSR. That was the dream, wasn’t it! How they miss being the Big Bug on the globe, if only in their dreams!
Years ago we had a section of the school we called Cowboy corner. It was the hangout of the cowboy “want to be’s” in the school. They were known for giving their fellows some guff, so each lunch period a teacher was assigned to spend the second half of the break on patrol there. One day when I was on duty, a big fine looking kid, in cowboy shirt, Levies, and boots was leaning up against the corner wall with a rope. It was a fine rawhide lariat – probably very valuable. As a group of students passed his position the lasso shot out and caught one by the foot. The cowboy, with a hoop of triumph pulled his target’s foot high in the air; amid a roar of laughter from all; all but me. I confronted the Cowboy – who stood a good head taller than I. “Give me the rope,” I demanded. The big Cowboy refused. --- “Mr. ______ (the Vide Principal) says it’s Okay if we only lasso our own kind!” he sneered. I demanded the rope and marched it down to the office. “Will Rogers” followed and vanished into the V. P.’s cubical. I imagine he got his rope back. The point that has bothered me all this time was the sense of entitlement the phrase, “our own kind” gave the kid.
It is the same with the blacks who use “forbidden” hate speech on a constant basis. It is the power, the sense of entitlement they gain from being able to do something that whites can’t that encourages this bad behavior. I find it odd that people of color exalt in the privilege of insulting themselves just because it is denied to whites. How foolish can you get?
I find it odd that people of color exalt in the privilege of insulting themselves just because it is denied to whites. How foolish can you get?
Agreed...and to show how foolish you CAN get...I think it is VERY interesting the number of middle and upper income white kids that desperately WANT in the game.
I suspect it is a bi-product of affluence...spoiling our children
so much that they end up thinking they have it bad.
Lysis...not sure if you have seen the latest out of England...
A majority of doctors that work for the government in England (providing socialized medicine) have refused to conduct abortions on moral grounds. The abortions are still largely occuring but many have been transferred to the private sector with Queeen and country paying for it.
Since abortion was liberalized in England their rates jumped from 20 to 40 percent almost overnight (if the article from the London report is to be believed).
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23392808-details/The+abortion+rebellion%3A+NHS+doctors+refuse+to+carry+out+terminations/article.do
Not meaning to stray from the topic at hand...
It seems the big top may finally be coming down on the Duke circus. I’ll leave rhetoric to anyone who’s feeling flowery but one can take a positive message from this: cooler heads have prevailed and the American justice system truly does work. I am elated to see a shining example of justice overcoming falsehood.
On the racial issue: I need an explanation on how insulting oneself makes you superior to others. I admit to be the common white male but how does referring to yourself with derogatory terms and other words that have meanings in line with gutter trash do anything other than make the racists happy? I am sure the KKK is ecstatic that the African-Americans have finally started admitting they truly are “insert racist term here”. It makes no sense to me that such words should be used. I understand what Lysis is saying about the power, but when they refer to themselves in those terms it just makes them look stupid in the eyes of most others, including African-Americans who have fewer of the ‘gangsta’ sensibilities. I do not intend this to sound offensive in any way, but the logic of this simply eludes me.
Mr. Nifong and his ilk do the justice system a great disservice. The Standard Exaggerater reported the other day that their investigation of a former Mormon bishop in Harrisville, UT on child sex abuse charges was going poorly.
The prosecutor's office said that people were not cooperating because they viewed the former bishop as having been ordained of God. Specifically, the prosecutor's office says they are having difficulty getting parents to interrogate their children.
I don't know this man, although, I may have sat in some of the same meetings with him. Let me be the first to say that if he is guilty, he should receive the full extent of punishment (and hopefully treatment) available.
But apparently his closest neighbors have difficulty convicting him without due process. Could it be that prosecutorial adventurists like Nifong (and countless prosecutors that sent people to prison in the 80s and 90s for abuse that turned out to be manufactured) have tainted legitimate investigations by crying wolf too often?
Didn't a poor woman in Salt Lake just have her life destroyed when police and prosecutors spread what turned out to be lies manufactured by a 16-year-old boy with a vendetta across the state's biggest media outlets? Should it be a mystery when a suspect's closest friends have questions about the integrity of an investigation?
Agenda driven politicians do indeed inflict real harm to real people -- perhaps even people not yet born. Prosecutors that cry wolf may diminish the ability of prosecutors to carry out a decent investigation for years to come. And that means that real future victims will be unnecessarily harmed.
Reach...
I am not too familiar with the case you are mentioning but it seems to me that
1-If I know a charge has been levelled, than I am visiting with my child and inquiring if there is anything he or she would like to talk about regarding the bishop or the church...regardless of level of accusation.
I hope my relationship with that child is positive enough to allow for a positive exchange.
2-I am not 'interrogating' my child, nor am I allowing some overzealous prosecutor to interrogate that child.
I have seen a recent case involving a child that was 3 years old at the time of an 'alleged' physical exchange between a 12 year old cousin. Putting aside the possibility of guilt or innocense, in their zeal to destroy the 12 year old cousin they have created trauma that simply wasnt there previously. They have done far greater damage and over a far greater period of time than ANYTHING that may have occured.
Which is just to say that there are right ways and wrong ways to proceed with fact finding...as the Duke case so readily points out.
"aeneas" wrote:
The concerns Americans are now exhibiting over a prosecutor run-amok are well justified. It appears that Nifong did what he could to make a sensational case out of a set of very weak facts for his own political gain and did so at the expense of the well being of the students accused in the case. Nifong withheld evidence from the defense and, apparently, refused to consider exculpatory evidence that should have inspired him to dismiss the case. This prosecutor’s “sins of commission” and “omission” have not only injured the accused students but their families and the larger community in general, in terms of wasted tax dollars, court hours, and contributing to the overall disparagement of this nation’s judicial system. But, where is America’s concern over the lack of prosecutorial action against Nancy Peloci who, it appears, has violated 18 USC Sec. 953 (The Logan Act)? It states:
“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”
The Logan Act was passed in 1799 and until Pelosi’s trip to Syria there have been few justifiable reasons to dust this law off. Neither Pelosi’s position nor reasons for going to Syria would be defenses to this law. A comparison of the elements listed above with her apparent actions, (made so very public by both western and middle-eastern news media), appear to indicate that she has committed a felony offense under U.S. law. I suppose it’s not ok for a prosecutor to commit the “sin of commission” to make a case where one does not exist as did Nifong, but that is exactly what the prosecutor did in his “witch hunt” in the Libby Case.
Now, it appears that another “sin of omission” is being committed by doing nothing to enforce The Logan Act in the face of both compelling and public evidence. I suppose if Peloci had simply travelled to France, (no friend of the U.S.), and met with government officials to discuss relations, and bad mouthed the Bush Administration to her heart’s content, even I might be tempted to exercise some “prosecutorial discretion” and let that particular violation of The Logan Act go unprosecuted. But in this case, she met with the president of Syria, a country actively supporting terrorism and undermining regional peace and security in the middle-east. In all three of these cases, we have prosecutorial misconduct, whether a sin of commission or omission. These sins injure America and the rule of law.
Anonymous;
I have no doubt that Pelosi intended to hurt the United States with her venture into “foreign policy”. It is obvious she did just that. However, I understand that the Logan Act allows Congress to give it permission for such behavior. She probably excused herself. But, just because Pelosi could do so legally dose not make her actions right.
This was a huge thing and then...pfffffft. The republicans in the house have no backbone...no leadership.
As to her trip...I go back and forth between cringing and laughing out loud when I hear these fools saying that what she did was a good thing. She didnt meet with opposition leaders, she met with exremists. And while each of them was fully enrolled in the PR facade, I can promise you also that each one of them had secret visions seeing this woman caned in a public square for daring to address men as equals.
Instead, they went along gladly, because the extremists and the useful idiots have a common enemy.
MM, it appears you are implying that the common enemy of Speaker Pelosi and the thugs she met with is the evil and hated G.W. Bush. It appears that some view Bush as so evil that treasonous behavior can be excused if the goal is to discredit the man.
First, I think the Nifong situation is exactly why civil lawsuits were invented. I don't like how litigious our society has become (don't tell the other lawyers), but this is a case where someone needs their butt sued.
Second, I have to disagree about the characterization of the libby case as a witchunt (at least from the actually prosecution standpoint). Media, liberal talking heads, and democrats in congress do not count, just talking about the actual prosecution.
Grand juries are an investigational tool. One does not have to have all the proof necessary at a trial to indict someone (if you don't like that, take it up with the constitution and the justice system as a whole). Lying to a grand jury is, and should be, a crime. What makes it stupider is that, at least with all the info I have garnered from the discussions here, Libby had no reason to lie the fault lay on others (including Wilson).
It is just as frustratingly stupid as Gonzales lying to congress (if he did), there was no need, so why do it.
that last one was Dan, for some reason its not accepting my password.
Just testing to see if it works now.
Reach...
I think you could say that is a fair conclusion...
I still marvel that some of these people believe they can negotiate with the enemy. Negotiotions ONLY work when both sides want the same goal. We want peace, they want us dead. In every region of the world where terror is a mainstay...it doesnt take a genious to see the common link, and that common link has been there for several decades.
Anonymous that sounds like Dan...
Do you think they were attacking Libby JUST because he may or may not have lied under oath or because they thought they could use him to go after bigger fish? I mean really...did the country just go through 2 years and how many millions of dollars because one individual may have lied but also may have been legitimately mistaken in testimony of something that wasnt a crime in the first place?
And isnt that a fishing trip?
First, you could call any grand jury a fishing trip, seeing as it is in place to get information, and has a much lower threshold of evidence that must be reached.
In political indictments, I think most screams of 'fishing trip' and 'prosecutorial misconduct' are flung around quite liberally if its 'your' guy getting indicted.
It may be that the point of the Libby indictment was to try to get someone higher up, in my opinion that is likely based on an assumption that there was crime higher up to uncover, very common use of indictment, so not sure what makes this different.
In my estimation the system worked, no one was charged with anything they didn't do. No trial was had on spurious charges. And no matter what Sean Hannity says (not that you get your opinion from him, just sick of him ranting about it), you don't have to be convicted of the original crime from the grand jury to be charged with perjury.
I just get sick of all the obfuscating. If you did nothing wrong, just talk openly. Gonzales should have put the congress in their place the first time, "Yeah, we fired 8 attorneys. So? They serve at the pleasure of the president and can be fired at any time for any, or no, reason whatsoever. They might have been fired because Bush didn't like their tie, and there isn't anything you can do about it congress, you know why? Because its none of your freaking business, thats the law."
If no one in the administration did anything wrong with the stupid plame thing, they should have just been upfront. "Yeah, I did an interview, yeah I said his wife worked for the CIA. Everyone knew it, she wasn't covert. She and her husband were constantly telling people what she did for a living, so yeah, Joe Wilson is full of crap."
Its the constant greasy feeling that comes from the dodging of questions that causes the belief that something fishy is going on. And if you didn't do anything wrong, don't lie to the grand jury. Because I don't believe in legitimate mistakes of fact in front of the grand jury. When you are going up there, you know what they are going to ask you, and if you don't remember, you say, I don't remember.
Dan...
I couldnt agree...more...in fact...that was my point RE Clinton...he should have looked them in the eyes and said "my personal life is none of your damn business" and the whole country would have been spared. Gonzalez too. Yes...I did it. When your administration has people that serve at your pleasure that refuse to serve at your pleasure you can fire them if you want to. Next question.
Nifong will likely face civil lawsuits. The people he directly harmed may get some cash. But none of that will restore the public's confidence in prosecutors.
Nifong and other adventurists have succeeded in damaging the ability of every prosecutor in the nation to do his/her job as well as they should be able to.
This is why character matters in our public officials. The after-the-fact civil lawsuits will never repair the broader damage that has been done.
True reach.
I can only be glad that for most of us, it is still a shock that a prosecutor would do this. And that most of us believe it is a rare occurrance.
Him getting disbarred may do something to help with public confidence.
With respect to the Duke case, Georgetown University law professor Randy Barnett gives an interesting (and positive) view of the legal profession in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece titled Three Cheers for Lawyers.
Cicero says;
It’s hard to feel the importance of this issue when America has lost, so far, 33 lives on the campus of Virginia Tech, but the following arguments made by Dr. Todd Boyd of USC School of Cinematic Arts presents some rebuttals to the things posted by Lysis and others regarding the Imus issue.
1. Imus was radio host whose show focused on news of the day, while hip hop and rap are fictionalized forms of cultural expressions. Imus is real, hip-hop is not, even though it may claim to be.
2. Rappers are fictionalized characters who are performing a character, scene, etc. It is artistic expression and society needs to recognize this and afford it the artistic expression given all artists.
3. Hip-hop/rap has taken words such as “diss,” “pimp,” and “bling,”—that was exclusive domain of black street culture and put the words in circulation. In many ways hip-hop took private conversations and made them public. Rap/hip-hop has opened the eyes of America and has allowed America to talk about race.
4. Does the firing of Imus represent a racial double standard with regard to hip-hop? “For those who believe the firing does indicate bias, their evidence would be that rappers use such language all the time and they seemingly get away with it. In this case, these people conclude that there is censoring of free speech when it comes to white people and their discussion of racial issues.”
5. Rappers and hip/hip has always been held accountable because of their speech. (he gives two examples in 1990 and 1992, which I will not recount)
6. Hip/hop did not invent cursing, slurs, bad language etc, but the expressions used in the music represent the way people talk on the street.
7. The final point Boyd makes is that he has never listened to Imus because he has a choice and does not have too. People who are offended by hip/hop need to make the choice to not listen to it.
I have never listened to Don Imus, but I've been hearing about him for years. I thought everyone knew what he was. I take exception to the claim, "Imus is real". Even Rush is more real than this guy.
I would like to express my heartfelt support for the right of all people to say stupid, hurtful, and offensive things, as well as the right of their employers to fire them for it when it becomes unprofitable.
I suspect Don Imus is still bewildered at what has happened, and I would say justifiably so. The remarks the MSM had so much fun playing over and over are exactly the kind of language he's known for. That's his schtick; it's what gets him the ratings and the advertising dollars. Who could have predicted this sudden reaction?
So just a quick note (More about this on my blog later) I listened to the Syrian ambassador to Brazil talk for about two hour today. He also criticized the American media, saying that they invent things for their own benefit all the time, including, Among the things he claimed that the media invented are the following
-that Syria was the protagonist in wars with Israel during the last 50 years,
-that major leaders in the middle east deny the existence of Israel,or call for the expulsion or extermination of the Jews,
-that Yaser Arafat(spelling?) died of natural causes(he claimed he Arafat was poisoned by Isreali terrorists.)
-That Hesbola, Hamas, or the Insurgency in Iraq are "Terrorist organization."
All these myths, were invented by the Isrealies and propagated by the American Media.
So Lysis I guess the government of Syria would join you in your critique of the media.
OK...So...Accroding to the Notorious P.h.D.-
1. Imus is real, hip-hop is not, even though it may claim to be.
OK...so if 'real'uses slang, thats destructive, but the unreal uses FAR worse...thats NOT harmful.
White DJ dehumanizes black girls-thats bad. Black Rapper dehumanizes black girls-chill...no big deal...its not real. Get out of my grill.
"Nappy headed ho"...thats a tragic travesty that disrespects young women.
"Smack my bitch up", "bitch better have my money", "bitch aint got but two things she is good for...earning and spreading", "nigga pimp ya ho- that what they fo"
These are just playful...colorful...unreal expressions of how the fella's in the street really talk...right? Seriously...which style of talk and from which speaker is more likely to have a detrimental affect on the way young black men treat women?
Oh...but it's OK because it is not real after.
2. It is artistic expression and society needs to recognize this and afford it the artistic expression given all artists.
Society should EMBRACE characterization of young black men as hooded up thugs and young black girls as their bootieshakin sexual rewards.
3. Rap/hip-hop has opened the eyes of America and has allowed America to talk about race.
Uhhhhh....no. Lets be honest...whites cant talk about race. Whites can apologize but they have no business discussing race.
4. Not sure...did he answer point 4 by simply re-asking the question?
I dont know if firing Imus is a double standard...it is a business decision.
The double standard comes when people rail against Imus and then hang out with and glorify people that use far worse language in describing young black women.
5. Rappers and hip/hip has always been held accountable because of their speech. Really? By who? How often do Rappers use homophobic language in their music and how many people get tacked to a wall because of it?
6. Hip/hop did not invent cursing, slurs, bad language etc, but the expressions used in the music represent the way people talk on the street.
and some folks on the street out there still call blacks nappy headed ho's and other more destructive terms. So it's all right then?
7. I have only ever very infrequently listened to Imus. I never found him funny. I never found him pithy. I occasionally respectyed that he sometimes asked tough questions.
And Amen...I can choose to not listen to both...and dont need anyone fired or another law passed.
in a week with so much to be sad about, i'll offer this one thing that has brought me a lot of happiness.
we had to amputate my dog's leg after she was in a terrible accident. my dad's been really sick this last while and this was the last straw for my poor mom.
out of the blue, unsolicited and unexpectedly my mom's older brother , scott, and younger sister, trudi, got together an amazing effort to pay for the expenses (which are well over 1000$). They are both amazing artists who blow glass and do lampwork beads from frits, ceramics and glasses. Each bracelet or pair sells for over 200$ usually. they each donated several bracelet sets and tons of other artists also donated beads for the auction. people who have never met us have donated amazing valuable works of art which should easily sell for enough to cover the surgery expenses.
the auction ends in 6 days and if you'd like to see pictures of my dog maggie, the beads or read the story you can follow the auction at
http://cgi.ebay.com/Tanner-Studios-MAGGIES-BEADS-Lampwork-Beads-175_W0QQitemZ120110410137QQihZ002QQcategoryZ34070QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Mindmechanic and Dan;
The crime is when a Grand Jury sets out to trap “someone – anyone” in order to make a tool out of them. What is disgusting about the Libby farce was that four years and millions of political dollars they spent knowing there was no crime. This is the same in the Duke case – the “prosecutor” know there was no crime, but for political reasons set out to fabricate them. And as the Duke case has demonstrated without millions of dollars and the support of honest people there is no way to stop this sort of railroading. That it is considered “par for the course” or at least standard fishing practice is sick. Trapping human beings in order to make them into bate is obscene.
Clinton was the Criminal. Hooking that bottom feeder is in no way comparable to tricking Libby into contradicting himself and then trying to force him to bargain for his life.
Reach Upward;
I am tired and a little bitter this morning. Yesterday was long and frustrating, but what Nifong did was criminal, and should be dealt with by the People. His brutality is no less egregious that that of a bully cop beating a black man for the kicks. Even worse. In ancient Athens the false accuser often had to serve the sentence he called on for the innocent accused. There’s a bit of Greek Law we ought to reconsider.
Cicero;
1. Imus was an entertainer JUST LIKE the rappers. They claim all the time to be making social commentary – Imus was a joker.
2. With stupid cowboy had and phony drawl Imus was nothing more that a performer. Neither is Kuric or Williams, or Hannity or Rosie. To hide hate and bigotry under the skirts of art is even more obscene than to pretend to report it as news.
3. No words are the “exclusive domain of anyone. To create an exclusive “Black street culture” is just as offensive as creating and exclusive white suburban culture. Words are just words. Our minds can deal with them – make the harmless – reduce then to the air they are. Rap/hip-hop has only made a lot of bad people rich and taught children to take dirt and now codified segregation. It is an “art” not worth having.
4. I agree – that hip hopers are allowed to say things that others are not, is racial discrimination.
5. No comment
6. As for Hip/hop representing the way people talk – Imus represents the way people talk and think. Again there is no difference.
7. Here we can all three agree. We can also all three agree to say that both Imus and raciest hip/hop are wrong. But there is and should be NO LAW against their mistake. Let the market determine this one.
Truth to Power;
Truly and powerfully said.
Boy;
I am eager to here more of the details, particularly to know if any in the university challenged the remarks of the ambassador.
Anonymous;
I concur in your response to Cicero. That all are here wrong – and that we can deal with it by a flick of the switch.
A Quiet Listener;
Thank you for the good news in the midst of so much sorrow – what a sad world it would be if it were truly as the news media portrays it. Thank all that is holy and true that the world is full of good people like the ones you remind us of. Who everyday do good things for the benefit of others and for the pure joy of love. Thank you.
NOW TO SOMETHING REALLY IMPORTANT!!!!
Yesterday the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the ban on partial birth abortion. More to come – but in his majority opinion Justice Kennedy championed at last the rights of the fetus. This great human rights advance might prove to be the greatest of the mean great gifts that the courage and wisdom of George W. Bush has given to American and the world.
I can't see any real effects coming from Gonzales v. Carhart other than political fundraising. I can't imagine it will save a single baby from abortion.
It was disturbing to read the opinion of our highest judicial power, that a law is OK specifically because it refrains from prohibiting chopping up a baby before it enters the birth canal.
"how can a people like this, that are without civilization—...
How can we expect that God will stay his hand in judgment against us?"
Gonzales v. Carhart was so vociferously fought because all sides understand that it is a baby step toward the undoing of the culture of infanticide.
Truth to Power and Reach Upward;
I find myself agreeing with both of you. I fear that not many babies will be saved by this single law, but it is a step. This is what the pro-death lobby most fears. Once it is recognized that unborn humans have human rights the mindless disregard for the value of their lives may at last begin to fade. That a nation can go catatonic in front of their TV’s over the terrible waist of 32 American lives and yet never think of the daily slaughter of thousands, is truly national insanity. We must move toward reason – by baby steps if it must be.
Gage the power of this law by the reaction of those who wish to eternally enshrine Roe – v – Wade.
What I found truly disturbing was the responses by Clinton, Obama, and Edwards. Not surprising mind you, but disturbing.
This should be one spot where it shouldn't matter if one is pro-choice, or pro-life. Why would anyone feel a need, or the ability to defend this procedure?
Bomb, bomb, bomb. Bomb, bomb, Iran
Repete
Repete
And
"I do not recall"
Repete
Repete
Repete
Repete
Repete
Repete
Repete
Repete
Repete
Repete
X 7 Repeted
And
"I have full confidence . . ."
Repeted ad infinitum
OK Republicans let's go hear Howard Dean's hilarious, career ending squeal one more time to heal our party's tattered soul.
Hey, what up?
Hannity's playing it now!
KILI FAQIRAN, Pakistan (AP) - The boy with the knife looks barely 12. In a high-pitched voice, he denounces the bound, blindfolded man before him as an American spy. Then he hacks off the captive's head to cries of "God is great!" and hoists it in triumph by the hair.
A video circulating in Pakistan records the grisly death of Ghulam Nabi, a Pakistani militant accused of betraying a top Taliban official who was killed in a December airstrike in Afghanistan.
An Associated Press reporter confirmed Nabi's identity by visiting his family in Kili Faqiran, their remote village in southwestern Pakistan.
The video, which was obtained by AP Television News in the border city of Peshawar on Tuesday, appears authentic and is unprecedented in jihadist propaganda because of the youth of the executioner.
Captions mention Mullah Dadullah, the Taliban's current top commander in southern Afghanistan, although he does not appear in the video. The soundtrack features songs praising Taliban supreme leader Mullah Omar and "Sheikh Osama"—an apparent reference to Osama bin Laden, who is suspected of hiding along the Afghan-Pakistan border.
The footage shows Nabi making what is described as a confession, being blindfolded with a checkered scarf.
"He is an American spy. Those who do this kind of thing will get this kind of fate," says his baby-faced executioner, who is not identified.
A continuous 2 1/2-minute shot then shows the victim lying on his side on a patch of rubble-strewn ground. A man holds Nabi by his beard while the boy, wearing a camouflage military jacket and oversized white sneakers, cuts into the throat. Other men and boys call out "Allahu akbar!"—"God is great!"—as blood spurts from the wound.
The film, overlain with jihadi songs, then shows the boy hacking and slashing at the man's neck until the head is severed.
Democrats are lining up to surrender the war on terror to these people.
Meanwhile, democrats line up to bemoan the supreme court upholding the ban on partial birth abortion. See if this doesnt sound as graphic...
During a partial birth abortion, the baby is turned to a breach position and removed by the feet. The doctor forces the head to remain in the birth canal (because if the head leaves the birth canal the baby is granted legal status) and then james a pair of scissors repeatedly into the base of the baby's skull, holding it firmly as the baby thrashes from the assault.
Democrats lined up yesterday to defend this barbaric practice.
Hey anon...why dont you and the democrats go try to FIND your soul before you worry about mine.
Ha!
Always thought you were a closet Republican despite your protestations to the contrary!
THATS the best response you can make?
My political tendencies have never been in question here, moron. I stated quite clearly...I left the republican party several years ago for the Libertarian party and returned after 2 years after realizing the libertarians as a party are a joke. I have never stated otherwise. I AM indepencdent...I DO have political leanings that go to BOTH extremes, left and right, and my writings here have clearly demonstrated that.
But...THATS your response? The fact that YOUR very obvious party is filled with cowards and whiners...filled with people that are so gutless they cant even take a POSITION on things like immigration reform, the fact that your party CELEBRATES the most barbaric slaughter of full term babies...
And you think in that pathetic little mind that you somehow have a GOTCHA moment?
You embarrass the anonymy and embarrass yourself.
Anonymous;
If being offended by the brutal execution of a man by a little brainwashed boy and the severing of a baby’s spine makes one a Republican; can you give me one justifiable reason why you are not a Republican?
Mindmechanic;
The only one who got got in this moment was this anonymous. I wonder if being for mindless murder makes one a Democrat?
Post a Comment