Thursday, August 31, 2006

PLAMEGATE HYPOCRISY: No Outrage at Armitage?

WHERE ARE THEY? You know, all the people who wanted Karl Rove "frog-marched" out of the White House? I mean, the cat's out of the bag. Richard Armitage, Colin Powell's assistant Secretary of State is the one who leaked Ms. Plame's name to Robert Novak. Armitage, along with Powell, opposed the Iraq war. Does this change their demand that "whoever" leaked her name should go to jail? Of course it does, because they never cared about the exposure of Ms. Plame. It was all about NAILING KARL ROVE. End of story. The hypocrites can get their jolly's watching Scooter Libby go to trial, but I doubt it will have much political impact, even in the unlikely event he is found guilty.

The ACLU vs. America — The Numbers Don’t Lie

Crossposted from Stop The ACLU

The ACLU thinks that parents have no right to know if their pregnant underage
daughter is seeking an abortion.


vs. America

80% of Americans think that parents have the right to know if their minor
daughters are seeking an abortion. (CBS News Poll July 13-14, 2005)
________________________________________________________________


The ACLU believes anyone, for any reason at any time should be allowed to abort a
child.


vs. America

75% of Americans believe that there should at least be some restrictions on
abortion. (CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll June 24-26, 2005)
________________________________________________________________



The ACLU opposes abstinence
education
.

vs. America

96% of American parents with children under 17 want their kids taught that
abstinence is the best approach to sex.
93% of American parents with children under 17 want their kids taught that
having sex leads to disease and pregnancy.
85 % of American parents with children under 17 want abstinence to be taught
with at least equal emphasis as contraception receives.
79% of American parents with children under 17 want their kids taught that teen
sex leads to harmful psychological and physical effects. (http://www.heritage.org/research/welfare/bg1722.cfm)
________________________________________________________________





The ACLU has fought to have constitutionally-sound displays that include the Ten
Commandments removed from public property.


vs. America

75% of Americans believe that the Ten Commandments should be displayed on public
property. (CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll June 24-26, 2005)
________________________________________________________________

The ACLU is
on record as supporting polygamy
.

vs. America

92% of Americans think polygamy is morally repugnant. (The Gallup Poll May 5-7,
2003)
________________________________________________________________



The ACLU has filed cases across the nation to redefine marriage
against the repeatedly expressed will of the people and, now the overwhelming
affirmation by even Left-leaning courts that the state is justified in retaining the definition of
marriage. (Note: the ACLU got smoked in an attempt to prevent Tennesseans from even having
the opportunity to express their will at the polls this year.)

vs. America

21 states have recently voted to protect marriage by an average
of 70%:
Alaska 68%, Hawaii 69%, Nebraska 70%, California 61%, Nevada 67%,
Arkansas 75%, Georgia 76%, Kentucky 75%, Louisiana 78%, Michigan 59%,
Mississippi 86%, Missouri 71%, Montana 67%, North Dakota 73%, Ohio 62%, Oklahoma
76%, Oregon 57%, Utah 66%, Kansas 70%; Alabama 81%; Texas 76%

________________________________________________________________


The ACLU believes that children should be trapped in failed public schools, even inner-city
children whose parents desperately want to escape the captivity of government
education.

vs. America

69% of Americans believe that parents should be able to choose their child’s
public school rather than being assigned based solely on residence location. (http://www.edreform.com/_upload/2005ncsw-poll.pdf).
63% of Americans believe that parents should be able to choose the best school
for their child, whether public or private. (Zogby International Polling July
2002)
________________________________________________________________




The ACLU opposes personally-initiated prayer in school and moments
of silence
as well as individual acknowledgement of
religious beliefs
at public events.

vs. America

83% of Americans think prayer should be permitted during school activities
including graduation ceremonies. (Gallup/CNN/USA Today Poll June 25-27, 1999)
________________________________________________________________



The ACLU has filed lawsuits and threatened cities and schools all across the country to prevent Christmas from
being openly celebrated in public fora.

vs. America

96% of Americans celebrate Christmas
87% of Americans believe Christmas displays should be allowed on public property.
(FOX News Opinion Dynamics Poll December 3-4, 2003)
________________________________________________________________



The ACLU has attacked Mt.
Soledad
memorial in San Diego since the the very beginning of Bush the
Elder's Administration because it includes a cross. This is just one of countless examples of the ACLU’s
seek and destroy mission to eliminate all religious symbols from public grounds.

vs. America

76% of San Diegans voted to save the Mt. Soledad National War Memorial from the
ACLU’s attack on behalf of a single atheist. That atheist, Jim McElroy was quoted as saying following the vote: “It still doesn't mean a damn thing," he said, according to the San
Diego Union-Tribune. “Voters should have never voted on it. It's a waste of
taxpayers' money.”

_______________________________________________________________

The reaction from ACLU-types will predictably be something like: “What is right
and Constitutional is not always popular.” Easy answer: What the ACLU does is
invent rights and distort the Constitution, which is why the ACLU is so
UNpopular. The ACLU has used dubious interpretations of law NEVER imagined by
our Founders with compliance from radical
judges
to push an agenda abhorrent to most Americans and indeed to the intent of the Constitution. Look no further than
the ACLU's pro bono defense of a website that advocates pedophilia and instructs its visitors in how to
rape children and evade prosecution. So...the ACLU considers encouraging
instruction on how to commit and get away with child rape a First Amendment
right...does anyone believe that the Founders would agree? Therefore, can't we
conclude that if the ACLU is so wrong on this, that it may be wrong on many
other things? Judge the evidence for yourself.

This has been a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us,
please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll.
Over 200 blogs already on-board.

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

STOP The ACLU SPECIAL BLOGBURST: Interview With William A. Donohue

Crossposted from STOP THE ACLU

William H. Donahue is the President of the Catholic League
for Religious and Civil Rights
based in New York. He received his Doctorate
in Sociology from NYU in 1980. He is the author of three books, two of which
are very critical on and revealing of the ACLU. We have quoted from his books
on numerous occasions so it was quite an honor when he returned my call
requesting an interview.

His first book, The Politics
of the American Civil Liberties Union
, was published in 1985. His second
book, The New Freedom:
Individualism and Collectivism
in the Social Lives of Americans, was written
while Bill was a Bradley Resident Scholar at The Heritage Foundation; it
appeared in 1990. Bill's third book, Twilight of Liberty: The Legacy of the ACLU, was
published in 1994 by Transaction Press; a new afterward to this book was
published in 2001. Source


It was an honor that Mr. Donahue took time from his schedule to allow us an
interview. It was even more encouraging that he had heard of Stop The ACLU and
expressed his appreciation for what we do. I recommend reading his books to
anyone that is interested in learning more about the ACLU and how their actions
are actually harming civil rights.

Our conversation was very laid back and informal. After some small talk and
introductions I started the interview asking Mr. Donahue his general opinion of
the ACLU. Mr. Donahue's answers will be quoted in the American Flag quotes.

I believe that the American Civil Liberties Union is based upon a
noble purpose. However, they often work against that very purpose due to a radical
interpretation of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I wrote about this
extensively in my third book, Twilight of Liberty: The Legacy of the
ACLU
where I focused on how their view of liberty actually works against
itself. They are an arm of the radical left. In my first book, The Politics
of the American Civil Liberties Union
, I also exposed just how phony their
claim of being non-partisan is. The ACLU is not non-partisan. Social reform, in a liberal
direction, is the sine qua non of the ACLU. Its record is far from showing
impartiality. It is full of attempts to reform American society according to
the ideals of liberalism. The truth of the matter is that the ACLU has always been a highly politicized
organization.


In your opinion is the ACLU simply misguided or do they actually have a more
malicious motive and agenda?

I have asked myself that question a million times or more. I guess
that I think that some of them are just wrong headed and sincere while others
are actually more malicious and seeking to actually destroy America from its
foundation. Some that are just misguided yet sincere truly believe that they
have to defend the extremist speech in order to protect all free speech. Others
are actually malicious.

Norman Siegal is one of the few who I believe to be honest and sincere in their
passion for civil liberties. He has at least come out and debated his point of
view and that is something that is due some respect. So many others are cowards
with another agenda that works against the best interest of the
country.


At this point I asked Mr. Donahue about other ACLU members that had come into conflict with the organization over their own views and
his opinion on their sincerity. I specifically asked about Natt Hentoff.

Read the entire interview at Stop The ACLU

This has been a production of Stop The ACLU Blogburst. If you would like to join us,
please email Jay or Gribbit. You will be added to our mailing list and blogroll.
Over 200 blogs already on-board.

CROSBY, STILLS, NASH & YOUNG: ANTI-WAR PROFITEERS!

I went down to the "Bush Bash/Anti-War" rally that was billed as a CSNY "concert." When Anna talked me into it, she just wanted to see a '60's or '70's "classic rock" act. Neither of us thought that it would be a political concert, but we should have known better. They featured 7 of Neil Young's "new" songs, including "Let's Impeach the President."

I wonder, why are the others along on this tour? CSNY hasn't put a song out in around 30 years, so they have nothing new as a group to promote. They must just hate Bush and the whole "war" thing enough to help Young "protest" him/it, and make some money while they're at it. I'm sure they care about all of the dead soldiers, whose images they showed on the screen behind them, at least as much as the Iraqi civillians that they showed on blurry green video tape.

Or was it the green in their wallets they see?

They didn't seem happy with the response from the crowd, which was subdued, thanks to the "dry arena" and "no smoking" restrictions put on the audience. I don't think that CSNY would attract too many rowdy drunks, but it could have been a policy of the Jones' Beach theater, which is an outdoor venue. Further, the audience wasn't fully seated when the concert started, because of awful management of the crowd at the entrance.

I screamed "BUSH ROCKS!" twice, and "IN IT TO WIN IT!" once, but the music was loud when I did it. I flipped the bird at them during an earlier "anti-Bush" song. Several others yelled various things, like "WAKE UP, NEIL!" at quiet times of the show, and were heard by everybody. I had a strange compulsion to say "Hey, Aaaaaa-BOT!, (from Abbot & Costello), at some of the slower moments of the second set. I didn't want to say anything political, but wanted to wake them up.

I'll pass on writing an actual review of the concert, though these are my first thoughts about it. There was no "encore," either, as Neil Young looked like he wanted to smash his guitar, at the end. I got a laugh out of it, seeing these old farts not accomplishing their mission to bring back the '60's anti-war fervor.

PS: They should have had Cindy Sheehan as a special guest, especially if they wanted to sell less tickets. I love a bunch of the classic rock songs by these guys, together and individually. The political stuff from the '60's should not be applied, updated, or changed to reflect this decade (which they had sense NOT to do in at least one song; "4 dead in Ohio") but this cheesy stench permeated much of this concert.

Friday, August 11, 2006

LEAVWORLD SUPPORTS PROPOSED SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' RESOLUTION!

One of the people in my Gather network, Lili Mazahery, happens to have contributed to the creation of a proposal going before the San Fran Board of Supervisors. I fully recognize that this is a governmental body that I disagree with over 90 percent of the time, particularly because they often vote on issues beyond their purview (The NYC council does this often, as well).

However, because Lili is a passionate advocate, and is championing a cause that I don't speak to directly often enough, but care deeply about, LEAVWORLD is endorsing the following resolution:

RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San
Francisco urges the U.S. State Department to issue a strong condemnation against
the Islamic Republic of Iran for its practices of civil and human rights abuses,
executions of minors, homosexuals and adulterers, and executions by the barbaric
and violent means of public stoning; and, be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors condemns the
criminalization of private, adult consensual sexual relations.

Many thanks to Lily Mazahery, who helped draft the resolution, Ross
Mirkarimi, the other Supervisors, the many City Hall staffers and the Mayor, all
of whom have expended tremendous political capital and energy on behalf of
ending all executions in Iran and the USA. Let this resolution from San
Francisco be the first of many across the land.


To have a liberal enclave like S.F. denounce Iran is a huge thing, if only symbolically. That this condemnation proposal comes up at this time is poignant, as well.

PROFILE THIS! Daily Terrorist Profiles From SWEET SPIRITS OF AMMONIA!

Sweet Spirits of Ammonia has issued another WAKE-UP CALL for the USA, as well as anyone interested in stopping Islamic terrorists, with a series of posts titled "PROFILE THIS!" These are excerpts from his first four "profiles" (links are to his full posts, with photos) :

I thought I would begin to do a "spotlight on terrorists" profile daily so that we can all see if there might be a trend.

Profile This #1

Today's special guest is Jaber A. Elbaneh, aka Jaber A. Elbanelt, Jaben A. Elbanelt, Jabor Elbaneh, Abu Jubaer, Jubaer Elbaneh, "Jubair" is on the FBI's "Most Wanted Terrorist List".

This American Muslim nut case was born in Yemen and gives his dob as 9/9/66. He is described as 5' 8" and 2oo lbs. with brown hair and eyes. He is charged with providing material support and resources to Al-Qaida. Jaber worked at Sorrento Cheese in NY and is believed to have been a cab driver in Yemen. He speaks with a Yemeni accent.

Profile This #2

This is Jainal Antel Sali, Jr., aka Abu Solaiman, The Engineer, Abu Solajman, Abu Sulaiman, Abu Sulayman. He is a Philippine national and a member of Abu Sayyaf, a militant Islamic terrorist group with a claimed goal of creating a pan-Islamic superstate across southeast Asia. His dob is given as 6/1/64. He has black hair and brown eyes, but his height and weight are unknown by the FBI. He is known to be clean shaven and has visible acne scars.

Profile This #3

Today's Terrorist is Ramadan Abdullah Mohammad Shallah, aka Ramadan Shallah, Rashad, Mohamad El-Fatih, Mahmoud, Radwan, Al-Shaer, Abu Abdullah, Ramadan Abdullah. His dob is given as 01/01/58. The FBI describes him as 6'1" and 225 lbs.

Shallah is a Palestinian and speaks Arabic and English. He earned a PhD in Banking and Economics from the University of Durham in England. He has worked as a university professor in several countries and has ties to Tampa, Florida; the Gaza Strip; Egypt; and London. He frequently wears eyeglasses, a moustache, and beard.

Profile This #4

Today's guest is a Lebanese member of Hezbollah. Mohammed Ali Hamadei, aka Mohammod Ali Hamadei, Ali Hamadi, "Castro" gives as a dob 6/12/64. The FBI describes him as 5'8", 150 lbs. with black hair and dark brown eyes. He has a mole on his right cheek below the eye. Hamadei speaks Arabic and German and is wanted for his role in the 1985, hijacking of a commercial airliner which resulted in one passenger, U.S. Navy diver Robert Stethem being murdered.

He was arrested in 1987 in Germany while attempting to smuggle liquid explosives. In addition to the West Germany charge of illegal importation of explosives, he was charged with the 1985 hijacking and hostage taking, was tried and convicted of Stethem's 1985 murder, and was sentenced to life in prison. However, he was paroled and released by German officials in 2005 and returned to Lebanon, after serving 19 years of his term.

If you have any information regarding these individuals contact your local FBI office.

Great stuff, as always, from Bob G. I highly recommend him to all readers.

NO MORE STONES! AN IMAGE BY LILI MAZAHERY


Official Bio: Ms. Lily Mazahery is a Persian-American attorney, and the founder and president of the Washington, D.C. based Legal Rights Institute. Ms. Mazahery is an active advocate of the human rights of women around the world and an outspoken opponent of laws that serve to oppress women in the name of religion. Ms. Mazahery provides expert commentary on Iranian and Islamic laws, as well as human rights violations in Islamic societies. She has testified before the U.S. Congress on the condition of women and children in Iran under the Islamic regime, and has described the atrocities to which women are subjected under the Sharia legal system, such as public hanging, public stoning, and temporary marriages.

In addition, Ms. Mazahery is currently assisting with the production of "Beneath the Veil," the award-winning play by legendary Iranian actress and playwright, Mary Apick . "Beneath the Veil" is scheduled to premiere in Fall of 2006 in Washington DC.

Ms. Mazahery has launched a website about women in Iran facing death by stoning, Stop Honour Killings, and is in my network on the Gather website (link in title). Image Copyright Lily Mazahery, 1996-2006 -- ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Used with permission.

Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Senate Hearings on Public Expression of Religion Act Set For Wednesday

Crossposted excerpt from STOP THE ACLU

When the ACLU wins a case against the Boy Scouts, the public display of the Ten Commandments, veterans memorials, and other symbols of American history and heritage guess who pays them? You do! However, there is current legislation going before the Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution, as well as a companion bill going before the House that is designed to put a stop to this.

Former ACLU attorney, Rees Lloyd,
whom I had the pleasure of interviewing, is stepping up to the plate.Record Gazette:

Rees Lloyd, Banning-based attorney and Commander of American Legion
District 21 (Riverside County), has been selected to testify on behalf of The
American Legion before the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution in
support of passage of Senate Bill 3696, Veterans Memorials, Boy Scouts, Public
Seals and Other Public Expressions of Religion Act of 2006 (“PERA).

S 3696 (PERA), sponsored by Sen. Brownback (R-Kan), a companion bill to
H.R. 2979 (PERA), sponsored by Rep. Hostetter (R-Ind.), would amend all relevant
federal laws to eliminate the authority of judges to award taxpayer-paid
attorney fees to the ACLU, or anyone else, in lawsuits under the Establishment
of Religion Clause of the First Amendment against veterans memorials, the Boy
Scouts, or the public display of the Ten Commandments of other symbols of
America’s history with a religious aspect.


The following is from an email sent out by Mr. Rees Lloyd:

While most Americans remain unaware of it, the ACLU has been reaping
millions of dollars in taxpayer-paid profits in lawsuits against veterans
memorials, the Boy Scouts, or against the public display of the Ten Commandments
or other symbol of our American heritage with a religious aspect.

For but three examples, the ACLU received some $950,000 in attorney fees in
a settlement with the City of San Diego in the ACLU’s lawsuit to drive the Boy
Scouts out of Balboa Park. In the famous Judge Roy Moore Ten Commandments Case,
the ACLU, and cohort so-called “public interest” law firms, received $500,000.
In the recent “Intelligent Design” case against the Dover school board, the ACLU
received $2,000,000 in attorneys by order of a judge — although the law firm
which represented the ACLU informed the court and public that it had acted pro
bono and waived any attorney fees. Thus, it was pure profit to the ACLU.

Further, the ACLU has used the threat of imposition of taxpayer-paid
attorney fees to extort local elected bodies, city or county councils, school
boards, into surrender to the ACLU’s demands to secularly cleanse the public
sphere of any evidence of our American religious heritage.

Moreover, the threat of imposition of orders to pay ACLU’s attorney fees in
such cases has caused third parties, like The American Legion and other
non-profit organizations, to suffer a chilling effect on their First Amendment
rights to participate in such lawsuits to protect veterans’ memorials.

S. 3696 (PERA), and H.R. 2679 (PERA), would put an end to that abuse of
benevolently intended laws by the ACLU, or anyone else following the ACLU’s
precedents, for instance, Islamist terrorists or their sympathizers in our
midst.

This reform of the law should be supported by all Americans across all
party, ideological, philosophical, or religious lines.

Simply put, the ACLU’s profiteering at taxpayer-expense by exploitation of
benevolently intended civil rights laws intended to benefit poor people is a
disgrace.


The ACLU have turned the intention of this Act, just like they do the Constitution, on its head. A huge portion of Establishment Clause cases are settled outside of court because of threatening and intimidation from the ACLU. Most of these small schools and towns can not afford to defend themselves from the well funded ACLU and give in to their demands and threatening letters. They know they can not afford to lose. If they do they will be paying for the ACLU’s attorney fees which in many cases reach the millions. Despite all of this some people are trying to claim, like the ACLU, that this law would prevent people who were actually injured by an arm of the state forcing religious views on people such as a school forcing children to pray from being able to afford to defend themselves.

Read the whole post at STOP THE ACLU, linked above, but I'll include the final paragraph:


The ACLU supports many radical causes, and while they may have every right to do so, it should not be at the expense of taxpayers that do not support such causes. Please contact your Congress critter, and representative, and tell them to support PERA. Find your Representative here. Find your Senator here.

Sign Our Petition To Stop Taxpayer Funding of the ACLU