DePaul University Says No to Pro-Marijuana-Legalization Group; Finkelstein was fine?

so the students of this Chicago University
can not have dialogs about this....

...but of course attacks on Israel
by professors they hired is fine?

The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has the details. The university admits that it is excluding the group from generally available student group registration benefits, because the university disapproves of the group’s message:

Considerable research indicates the use of cannabis does not contribute to healthy decision-making, particularly in college-age populations. Given the above, the University determined that recognizing the “Students for Cannabis Policy Reform Group” as a DePaul student organization would not be congruent with out institutional goals regarding the health and well-being of our students.

I rather doubt that recognizing such a group would materially affect the level of marijuana use by DePaul students. But denying recognition would affect the amount of debate about marijuana policy that takes place. Sounds like unhealthy decision-making on the university’s part to me.
DePaul is a private university, so it’s free to engage in unhealthy decision-making. But banning the expression of some views, it seems to me, is the gateway drug to broader restrictions as well, restrictions that are even more dangerous to the culture of debate and discussion that universities, private and public, ought to be promoting. DePaul itself has officially stated, in its Guiding Principles on Speech and Expression that it is “committed to fostering a community that welcomes open discourse.” And while that document seems to suggest that DePaul’s Catholic mission may support some restrictions aimed at protecting “dignity,” “respect,” and “civility,” I don’t see anything in that statement that justifies discrimination against student speech that promotes legalization of marijuana. So I’m glad that FIRE is taking DePaul to task for its position.
Finally, DePaul’s letter suggests that denying recognition to the student group would still leave open “myriad opportunities for students to gather together and express their views to the larger community regarding the use of and/or legalization of cannabis.” But if indeed the group will be able to speak as effectively without the benefits of recognition, then I don’t see how the university’s action will further its stated goals. And if the university’s action will somehow diminish the amount of speech that might promote “[un]healthy decision-making,” then that must mean that the university hopes the group will not speak as effectively without the benefits of recognition.

via volokh.com

noahdavidsimon's posterous

Hinchey comes Unhinged. Tries to STRANGLE REPORTER

I am the managing editor of the Daily Freeman, Kingston, NY, for which the reporter, William Kemble, works. The following is a statement I have prepared in response to the misrepresentations of this incident by Congressman Hinchey’s office:
There was an incident. Mr. Kemble says the congressman put a hand on his neck. A third party who witnessed the incident says he did not see that, but did see the congressman jabbing Mr. Kemble in the chest with his finger. Yet another witness says Kemble was pushed into the path of another person by the congressman.
For his part, Mr. Kemble views the incident as an unwanted distraction to his work.
However, as managing editor, I take seriously the issue of anyone, including a congressman, putting their hand on or jabbing with a finger a reporter who is simply doing his job.
Further, the Hinchey camp’s characterizations of the incident as either prompted by aggressive action by Mr. Kemble or by false accusations they claim he and the Freeman have made are untrue.
First, the videotape of the questioning of Mr. Hinchey clearly shows that while Kemble was persistent, he was professional and even in tone, while it was Hinchey who lost his composure. The congressman should own up to what everyone can see.
Second, the specific question that Mr. Kemble was asking prior to the incident and which apparently provoked the congressman involves Hinchey’s real estate interest in a commercial Saugerties development which was referenced in a congressional disclosure form for funding of a Hudson River ferry project. To our knowledge, Congressman Hinchey has never answered questions about that connection, which is why Mr. Kemble was posing the question to him.
We stand by our reporting on federal funding to an area Mr. Hinchey represents . We have made no false allegations nor has Mr. Hinchey proven once, never mind “numerous times,” that any of our reporting was false.
Readers may judge for themselves. The stories are posted online at:

via hotair.com

KINGSTON — U.S. Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-Hurley, leads federal representatives in the region in securing federal pork-barrel funds for local projects, according to the Council for Citizens Against Government Waste’s annual “Pig Book,” which put Hinchey’s budget earmarks at $54.96 million.

via dailyfreeman.com

SAUGERTIES — U.S. Rep. Maurice Hinchey has a financial interest in the Partition Street Project, which is to be constructed within the village for which he secured $800,000 in federal funding for a sewer infrastructure project his office called “critical to the village’s commercial future.

via dailyfreeman.com

SAUGERTIES — A village official says U.S. Rep. Maurice Hinchey overstated at the outset the planned use of $800,000 in federal money to rehabilitate sewer lines.
In announcing the funding last fall, a Hinchey press release specifically mentioned rehabilitation of Partition Street infrastructure from Main Street to the Esopus Creek bridge. Lines along that route would have run past the Partition Street Project, a hotel and conference center in which the congressman, a Hurley Democrat, has a property interest.

via dailyfreeman.com

Hinchey gets dissed by Ed Koch

Yesterday, Maurice Hinchey had to get Bill Clinton out to Binghamton to try to rescue his re-election bid and save his House seat.  Today, Republican challenger George Phillips trumps Hinchey with a surprise endorsement from former New York City Mayor Ed Koch, a Democrat who has a track record of backing common-sense Republicans.  Hot Air reports exclusively this morning that Koch will deliver a speech tomorrow afternoon in Kingston announcing his endorsement of Phillips.
Why is Koch opposing the Democratic incumbent?  Koch is apparently unhappy with Hinchey over the nine-term Congressman’s hostility towards Israel.  In his speech, Koch will hit Hinchey over his 2002 meeting with Yasser Arafat at the PLO leader’s headquarters, one of only three members of the House that met with Arafat there.  Hinchey also “voted against the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism act, designed to promote the development of democratic institutions in areas under the administrative control of the Palestinian Authority,” and refused to sign either the Poe-Peters or Hoyer-Cantor letters which supported Israel’s right to control access to Gaza to prevent armaments to flow into the Hamas-controlled territory.
It’s not just Israel, either.  Hinchey voted against tougher sanctions on Iran as well, which Koch will mention in his announcement.  Koch will also hail Phillips for his work while on the staff of Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) on foreign policy, especially on legislative efforts to force UN reform by purging support for terrorism and antisemitism at Turtle Bay.
This not only gives Phillips high-profile bipartisan support for his challenge to Hinchey, it also gives Phillips the kind of policy heft that most challengers usually lack in Congressional races.  It gives voters in NY-22 a reason to feel comfortable in following their anti-incumbent impulse.  It’s a big win for Phillips, and even more reason for Hinchey to be looking over his shoulder the next three weeks.

via hotair.com

Ukraine to begin oil and gas extraction in Venezuela

By BNO News
KIEV, UKRAINE (BNO NEWS) — Ukraine on Monday announced that it will begin oil and gas extraction in Venezuela after an agreement was reached by the Presidents of the two nations.
Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych met with his Venezuelan counterpart Hugo Chávez in Kiev on Monday, where the South American leader arrived after visiting Russia and Belarus.

Ukraine is looking to diversify its energy imports in order to diminish its dependence on Russia, which is Kiev’s main supplier of oil and gas.
“Ukraine should extract oil and gas there (in Venezuela). It is very important for us, and we agreed today to step onto this path,” Chávez said.
Venezuela has one of the largest oil and natural gas reserves in the world. The Venezuelan government recently estimated that its oil deposits have reached 316 billion barrels, which positions the South American country as one of the top ten oil exporters.
Chávez also visited the Antonov Aeronautical Scientific/Technical Complex in Kiev. He was shown the commercial aircraft AN 148, one of the Ukrainian airplanes that the government of Yanukovych is offering to Venezuela with the possibility of being built in Caracas.
Since 1946, Antonov has built more than 22,000 aircrafts from around 100 different models. The complex has 15 manufacturing plants and over 50 research facilities. Over 6,000 Antonov’s airplanes are being used in 77 countries including Russia, Iran, Peru, India, Colombia, Chile, Mexico and Cuba.
Chávez began last Thursday an international tour of ten days in which he will visit seven countries in Europe and Asia. He first visited Russia, followed by Belarus. Then, he departed to Ukraine for his first-ever visit to the country. He will continue his tour in Iran, Syria and Portugal.

via wireupdate.com

noahdavidsimon's posterous

Palestine's Web 2.0

And while U.S. media has lauded Palestinian Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad's efforts to reform the West Bank, online forums indicate that Palestinians are not impressed. Some forums circulated articles declaring Fayyad a puppet of the West, while others claimed that his government is constitutionally illegitimate. More broadly, Palestinians are deeply suspicious of any collaboration with the United States, Fayyad's most important political ally.

via schanzer.pundicity.com

Jonathan Schanzer and Mark Dubowitz
The National Interest
18 October '10
In the waning days of his presidency, Bill Clinton believed Yasir Arafat and the Palestinians were prepared to make peace. In September 2000, the Palestinians launched a guerrilla war. Five years later, President George W. Bush believed the secular Fatah faction would win the Palestinian legislative elections of 2006. Instead, the Islamist terror organization Hamas won by a large margin. Drawing from erroneous poll data and misreading the realities on the ground, Washington has too often minimized antipeace sentiment on the Palestinian street. Is President Barack Obama, in his current push for Middle East peace, about to repeat the mistakes of presidents past?
Imagine that Obama's advisors could simultaneously sit in a dozen Palestinian markets, or souks, and listen to thousands of Palestinians speaking in Arabic about U.S. policy priorities in the Middle East. More importantly, imagine those conversations had no outside influence.
In April 2010, we launched a study with that in mind. Our organization, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), commissioned ConStrat, a company that deploys military-grade technology on behalf of the United States Central Command, to study online Palestinian political sentiment. For nine weeks, ConStrat culled thousands of Arabic language posts from search engines, unstructured social media sites, YouTube, Twitter, social networks (like Facebook), wikis, and RSS feeds.
While polls are often designed to elicit specific responses, social media is largely free of outside manipulation. Most Palestinians write under pseudonyms, enabling them to discuss controversial issues without fear of retribution. Admittedly, social media captures only the sentiments of literate Palestinians with access to computers and with passionate views. But it offers important insights nonetheless.
(Read full article)

via calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com

noahdavidsimon's posterous

Maliki’s Audience with Khamenei, Ahmadinejad

Shayan Ghajar
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki began his visit to Tehran early on October 18, meeting first with Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and then with Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Maliki’s visit is yet another ominous indication that Western governments with a stake in the Iraqi elections face competition from Iran for the outcome of the effort to form a unity government.
The Iranian government is already celebrating Ahmadinejad’s visit to Lebanon last week as proof that “Iran is on top” in the Middle East, not Europe or the United States, according to a senior Iranian MP quoted in Fars News, a semi-official news agency with links to the IRGC. Consequently, Maliki’s visit is being heralded as another sign of Iran’s triumphant foreign policy in the Iranian state-owned or affiliated press.
Indeed, Maliki’s own rhetoric during the meetings stressed the Iraqi government’s ties with Iran: “Iraq’s relations with the Islamic Republic are strategic and on top of our relations with other states,” Maliki declared, according to Fars News. This statement is a not-so-subtle signal to the United States that Maliki is not inclined to form a government with secularist leader Ayad Allawi, instead opting to use Iranian support to form a primarily Shi’a coalition. The United States, hoping to avert sectarian conflict, is urging a secular rather than Shi’a government which satisfies Sunni Arab and Kurdish demands for inclusion.
Iran played a pivotal role in shaping Maliki’s nascent government, using its spiritual authority to urge the influential Moqtada al-Sadr, a powerful Shi’a cleric, to lend his support to Maliki. As a result, Maliki’s number of seats in parliament is far closer to that which is required to form a government.
Thus, while the United States urges Maliki to gradually build a secular government, Iran’s leadership is urging the various Iraqi factions to hurry up and support Maliki. Ayatollah Khamenei repeatedly emphasized in his meeting with Maliki, “All Iraqi officials and politicians and those who care for Iraq should focus their efforts on the swift formation of a unity government,” according to www.khamenei.ir, the official website of the Supreme Leader. Khamenei also urged the rejection of the influence of the United States or other Western governments. Ahmadinejad continued in the same vein, asserting that the Middle East can be managed by Middle Eastern nations without interference.
Maliki returned the favor by declaring that “Iraq pursues increasing relations with Iran in all fields.” According to Iran’s official English-language agency, PressTV, Maliki also praised Ahmadinejad’s recent trip to Lebanon: “During your visit to Lebanon, the Zionist regime [of Israel] was on high [military] alert, which proved they are really cowards,” he declared.
Just days previous to Maliki’s visit, his secularist rival Ayad Allawi accused Iran in a CNN interview of actively manipulating Iraqi politics, while sponsoring destabilizing terrorist groups across the region.

via insideiran.org

noahdavidsimon's posterous

Pakistan intelligence services aided Mumbai terror attacks

Smoke and flames pour from the Taj Mahal hotel in Mumbai during the November 2008 attacks. Photograph: AFP/Getty Images

Pakistan's powerful intelligence services were heavily involved in preparations for the Mumbai terrorist attacks of November 2008, according to classified Indian government documents obtained by the Guardian.
A 109-page report into the interrogation of key suspect David Headley, a Pakistani-American militant arrested last year and detained in the US, makes detailed claims of ISI support for the bombings.
Under questioning, Headley described dozens of meetings between officers of the main Pakistani military intelligence service, the ISI, and senior militants from the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) group responsible for the Mumbai attacks.
He claims a key motivation for the ISI in aiding the attacks was to bolster militant organisations with strong links to the Pakistani state and security establishment who were being marginalised by more extreme radical groups.
Headley, who undertook surveillance of the targets in Mumbai for the operation, claims that at least two of his missions were partly paid for by the ISI and that he regularly reported to the spy agency. However, the documents suggest that supervision of the militants by the ISI was often chaotic and that the most senior officers of the agency may have been unaware at least of the scale and ambition of the operation before it was launched.
More than 160 people were killed by militants from LeT who arrived by sea to attack luxury hotels, a Jewish centre, a café, a hospital and the main railway station in Mumbai, the Indian commercial capital. Casualties included citizens from 25 countries, including four Americans killed and seven Britons injured. The attacks dominated media for days and badly damaged already poor Indian-Pakistan relations.
European and American security services now fear that LeT, which has thousands of militants, runs dozens of training camps and has extensive logistic networks overseas, is moving from what has been a largely regional agenda – focused on the disputed Himalayan former princely state of Kashmir – to a global agenda involving strikes against the west or western interests. The documents suggest the fierce internal argument within the organisation over its strategic direction is being won by hardliners.
Headley, interviewed over 34 hours by Indian investigators in America in June, described how "a debate had begun among the terrorist outfits" and "a clash of ideology" leading to "splits".
"The aggression and commitment to jihad shown by several splinter groups in Afghanistan influenced many committed fighters to leave [LeT]," Headley said. "I understand this compelled the LeT to consider a spectacular terrorist strike in India."
Headley, who changed his name from Daood Gilani, told the investigators that the ISI hoped the Mumbai attack would slow or stop growing "integration" between groups active in Kashmir, with whom the agency had maintained a long relationship, and "Taliban-based outfits" in Pakistan and Afghanistan which were a threat to the Pakistani state.
"The ISI … had no ambiguity in understanding the necessity to strike India," Headley is reported to have said. The aim of the agency was "controlling further split in the Kashmir-based outfits, providing them a sense of achievement and shifting … the theatre of violence from the domestic soil of Pakistan to India."
Headley describes meeting once with a "Colonel Kamran" from the military intelligence service and having a series of meetings with a "Major Iqbal" and a "Major Sameer Ali". A fellow conspirator was handled by a Colonel Shah, he claims. Headley also alleges that he was given $25,000 by his ISI handler to finance one of eight surveillance missions in India.
However, Headley describes the ISI director general, Lt General Shuja Pasha, visiting a key senior militant from LeT in prison after the attacks in a bid "to understand" the operation, implying that, as many western security agencies suspect, the top ranks of the agency were unaware of at least the scale of the planned strike.
The Pakistani government has repeatedly denied any involvement of any security official in the Mumbai attacks. Last night, an ISI spokesman told the Guardian the accusations of the agency's involvement in the Mumbai attacks were "baseless".
LeT was banned in Pakistan in 2002. Jamat-ud Dawa, the social welfare wing of LeT, has been blacklisted in the wake of the Mumbai attacks although it continues to function.
The revelations could prove embarrassing to the US government as well as to the Pakistanis. Reports in American newspapers over the weekend claimed that Headley's wife had tried to alert American authorities to her husband's activities but had been ignored.

via guardian.co.uk

a Muslim country attacked some Jews. The Antisemitic U.K. Guardian sounds shocked when the truth is exposed with Islam. The rest of us swallow this bitter truth daily as we are attacked by administrators on major social networks for the truth

noahdavidsimon's posterous