Labels: 911 Troofers» Alex Jones» Charlie Sheen» Conspiracy» Dumb Nazi Asses» Fukushima complex» Japan» Nuclear» nuclear meltdown» Stuxnet» Troofer Girls
Labels: Anal Sex» dignity of women» feminism» Help Me Help this Passive Aggressive Hippie have Sex» oral sex» Sex» sex slave» SEX.... I won't behave» sexual abuse» sexual harassment» Women
Labels: Accuracy in Media» Crystal Mangum» Duke» feminism» Main Stream Media» Media» media bias» Media Rape» NYTimes
this chick come back to bite the lamestream media in the ass:
It was a tiny item in the New York Times -- a brief at the bottom of page B14 of Tuesday's sports section, under Lacrosse: “Crystal Mangum, who falsely accused three Duke players of raping her in 2006, was charged with murder in the death of her boyfriend.” The man died two weeks after Mangum stabbed him, and Mangum has now been charged with murder.
The Times may prefer to forget that name, but it was far more interested in Crystal Mangum back in 2006. More than any other media outlet, the Times trumpeted her rape accusations against three Duke lacrosse players, accusations that quickly fell apart in a mass of contradictions and shifting stories.
Yet even as the case fell apart and other liberal media outlets were backing away, the Times issued a now-notorious, error-riddled 5,000-word lead story by Duff Wilson on August 25, 2006, concluding that there was enough evidence against the players for Michael Nifong, the soon-to-be-disgraced-and-jailed local prosecutor, to bring the case to trial:
By disclosing pieces of evidence favorable to the defendants, the defense has created an image of a case heading for the rocks. But an examination of the entire 1,850 pages of evidence gathered by the prosecution in the four months after the accusation yields a more ambiguous picture. It shows that while there are big weaknesses in Mr. Nifong's case, there is also a body of evidence to support his decision to take the matter to a jury.
Perhaps most atrocious was former columnist Selena Roberts, who made a habit of slurring the innocent Duke lacrosse players. Even after the players had been all but formally cleared of the sexual assault, she continued to blame white privilege: “Don't mess with Duke, though. To shine a light on its integrity has been treated by the irrational mighty as a threat to white privilege. Feel free to excoriate the African-American basketball stars and football behemoths for the misdeeds of all athletes, but lay off the lacrosse pipeline to Wall Street, excuse the khaki-pants crowd of SAT wonder kids.”
via politikditto.comit is very hard for men to protect themselves from women whose testimony is full of contradictions. the media and liberal judges don't do a thing when a woman commits perjury.
Labels: Barack Obama» Mubarak
Mubarak "is in suite 309 and his health is unstable," the source was quoted as saying by MENA. Doctors are following up on Mubarak's health and "carrying out several medical tests to know the cause of the instability," the source added. (AFP) via ynetnews.comThe cause of the instability... trusting Obama. Obama tried to call former US ally Hosni Mubarak after pushing him from office. Mubarak won’t answer. Would you? Obama threw Mubarak under the bus but stood by idly when there was a similar uprising in Iran. image via weaselzippers.us and gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com and via tukier.com
Labels: AAUP» academia» academic bias» Berkeley» Cary Nelson» college» Kenneth L. Marcus» Kenneth Stern» London» Omar Barghouti» Rutgers» U.K.» UC Santa Cruz» University of California at Irvine» ZOA
Jonathan S. Tobin
Should the federal government intervene when an American university permits its campus to become unsafe for Jews? When the prevailing atmosphere on campus is hatred against Israel and all things associated with the Jewish people?do a Google search on the issue and tell me this is fair and unbiased?
After a long and involved debate, the Obama administration finally did the right thing last October and stated definitively that such conduct is impermissible at institutions that receive federal funding. While that ruling, which was prompted by an epidemic of anti-Semitic harassment of Jewish students at the University of California at Irvine, ought to have been welcomed by both academia and the organized Jewish world, it has now been challenged by the American Association of University Professors. In a newsletter on the AAUP website, Cary Nelson (the association’s president) and Kenneth Stern of the American Jewish Committee contend that recent events on American university campuses—at Berkeley, Santa Cruz, and Rutgers in addition to Irvine—do not rise to the level of a “working definition” of anti-Semitism. Calls for redress by Jewish students and professors are nothing more, they conclude, than an unscrupulous effort to “censor anti-Israel remarks.”
But Nelson and Stern are wrong both about the situation on campus. And they are wrong about the motivations of those whose activism led the U.S. Department of Education to issue its ruling.
Last September, one month before the ruling was issued, COMMENTARY published Kenneth L. Marcus’s essay “A Blind Eye to Anti-Semitism,” a thoughtful examination of the sordid goings on at the Cal-Irvine and the halting steps taken toward combating the epidemic of anti-Semitic acts that had taken place there. The former head of the U.S. Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights, Marcus detailed not only the unhappy story of how the university had failed to protect Jewish students, but also set forth the legal rationale for the federal government ’s intervention. He pointed out that Title VI of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in federally funded universities and public schools. Although it has been argued that laws banning racism do not apply to Jews (who are not a race but a people), Marcus rejoined persuasively that, in addition to being a religion, Judaism is a group identity that involves more than adherence to a faith.
Contrary to Nelson and Stern, what is happening on campus isn’t merely the free exchange of ideas about Israeli policies. As Marcus wrote:
There, on the campus of the University of California at Irvine, Jewish students were physically and verbally harassed, threatened, shoved, stalked, and targeted by rock-throwing groups and individuals. Jewish property was defaced with swastikas, and a Holocaust memorial was vandalized. Signs were posted on campus showing a Star of David dripping with blood. Jews were chastised for arrogance by public speakers whose appearance at the institution was subsidized by the university. They were called “dirty Jew” and “fucking Jew,” told to “go back to Russia” and “burn in hell,” and heard other students and visitors to the campus urge one another to “slaughter the Jews.” One Jewish student who wore a pin bearing the flags of the United States and Israel was told to “take off that pin or we’ll beat your ass.” Another was told, “Jewish students are the plague of mankind” and “Jews should be finished off in the ovens.”
The result of these incidents was that Jewish students rightly feared the consequences of speaking up in opposition to this spirit of intolerance. While it may be held that the university should have been able to handle this problem without federal intervention, the truth is that the school did nothing. Cal-Irvine officials reacted to complaints with indifference or without urgency. The Jewish community was left with little choice but to resort to legal complaints seeking to compel the government to enforce the law against discrimination. It is very much to the credit of the Zionist Organization of America that it championed this cause.
Although Nelson and Stern wrongly treat the students complaints as if they were trivial, they also claim that the resort to the law harms the cause of fighting anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism. Government intervention shifts the discussion, they believe, from opposing bigotry to protecting free speech.
Anti-Semites will howl that they are being repressed if they are prevented from spreading hatred for Jews on university campuses. No question about it. But those who preach hatred for African-Americans could make the same argument. Even to ask whether Nelson or Stern would be okay with the Ku Klux Klan’s holding officially sanctioned forums at federally-funded schools, however, is to answer the question.
Nelson and Stern go on to compare the warnings about campus anti-Semitism to the debate over immigration laws. But the comparison is just as specious. There is, after all, a clear distinction between advocating enforcement of existing laws against illegal immigration and broadcasting anti-Hispanic hate, even if the distinction is often erased in the heat of debate. No one is calling for Israel’s critics to be barred from campus. Harassing Jews in classrooms and public spaces as well as holding authorized campus events whose purpose is to promote the delegitimization of the Jewish people, however, crosses the line from unpleasant speech to an illegal promotion of violence.
The atmosphere of hatred created at Cal-Irvine in 2003 and 2004 and now being duplicated at other American universities stands as a watershed event in the history of the movement to defame Zionism and the Jews. At a time when this pernicious movement tries to flood into America through the classroom door, it is more important than ever that decent people speak out against the rising tide of international anti-Semitism. When universities fail to restrain the haters, it is up to the government to treat Jew-hatred no differently than it would bigotry against any other minority group. No matter what the AAUP says.
Last Friday, eleven Muslim 'students' were arraigned in a California court and plead not guilty to charges stemming from their disruption of a speech by Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren in February 2010. How could someone be criminally charged for exercising their right of free speech by heckling a speaker they didn't like - and in the United States no less? That's exactly the point, writes Yair Rosenberg in the Harvard Crimson. You have the right to speak but so do others who disagree with you. In this particular case, the 'students' were shown to have planned to prevent Oren from speaking at all. That steps over a line.
To understand why this prosecution is justified, and indeed similar future prosecutions of campus disruptors are warranted, one must first understand what this prosecution is not.It might be enough to inhibit these people in the future and maybe others as well. But unfortunately, the facts in this case seem uniquely suited for prosecution - a mistake that the BDS'ers are not likely to make again.
It is decidedly not an “absolute affront to the Constitution” that will “inhibit the free exchange of ideas,” as Dan Stormer and Jacqueline Goodman, two of the Irvine defense attorneys, have claimed. It is their clients who sought to inhibit the free exchange of ideas by shouting down Oren’s speech, preventing him and the estimated crowd of 500-700 individuals from exercising their rights to free speech and assembly.
In fact, when viewed through the lens of pragmatism rather than partisanship, the prosecution of these disruptors clearly protects our civil discourse. Imagine, for contrast, a campus climate in which it is possible for any sufficiently motivated group to shut down an event to which it is ideologically opposed. Not only would Ambassador Oren and General Petraeus be shouted off the stage, but Nancy Pelosi would be accosted with cries of “baby killer,” while Omar Barghouti, who spoke recently at Harvard to advocate boycott of Israel, could be met with jeers of “terrorist” and “anti-semite.” It is essential for the preservation of considered campus conversation that such suppressive “speech” never be tolerated, no matter the opinion being espoused. Simply put, no partisan should have a vocal veto over the marketplace of ideas.
Beyond the practical necessity of such prosecution, there is also strong legal justification for it. As Professor Eugene Volokh of UCLA, a renowned free speech expert explains, “California law rightly makes it a crime to interfere with people’s rights to speak, and listeners’ rights to listen.” Volokh is a long-time equal opportunity advocate for First Amendment rights, having defended flag-burning, anti-Israel bus advertisements and even the permissibility of voluntarily-assumed Sharia arbitration on U.S. soil. To him, the Irvine case is not an example of individuals exercising free speech but rather attempting to stifle it. “Of course, the defendants have their own free speech rights,” he says. “They could have freely exercised them outside the meeting. They could have exercised them during Q&A … They could have exercised them by staging their own event. But First Amendment law has long recognized that there’s no right to speak so loudly that it interferes with other people’s activity.”
Countering a misconception, Volokh adds that “while a jail term is theoretically available” if the defendants are found guilty, “it will be highly unlikely for first offenders.” Rather, “in a case such as this, the defendants … will be fined, put on probation, and possibly sentenced to some community service.” And that, he concludes, “sounds like about the right punishment.”
Read the whole thing. And if you speak to groups in public, know your rights. No one has the right to shut you down. At least in theory.
..Oh yes they can. And the time has come for them to be forced to:
Islamic fundamentalism is being allowed to flourish at universities, endangering national security, MPs and peers said yesterday.
Labels: airport» facebook» Gordon» pedophile» TSA» YouTube
Your tax dollars at work.
A passenger screener at Philadelphia International Airport is facing charges that he distributed more than 100 images of child pornography via Facebook, records show.So this scumbag has privacy protections, yet passengers get groped by folks like him.
Federal agents also allege that Transportation Safety Administration Officer Thomas Gordon Jr. of Philadelphia, who routinely searched airline passengers, uploaded explicit pictures of young girls to an Internet site on which he also posted a photograph of himself in his TSA uniform.
Homeland Security agents arrested the TSA officer March 24, and he is being held without bail.
Although the case was unsealed Thursday, neither the indictment nor the news release mentioned Gordon's job searching airline passengers for TSA.
The arrest comes as TSA grapples with several other incidents involving screeners, including a YouTube video posted last week by parents angry about the pat-down their 6-year-old daughter received at an airport in New Orleans. TSA officials said the pat-down was proper; the parents said the girl was "groped."
Citing privacy rules, TSA spokeswoman Ann Davis would not say if Gordon has been suspended from his job, but noted that he had been in federal custody since his arrest.
"We can assure the public that he is no longer working at the airport," Davis said.
Gordon began working as a TSA screener at the Philadelphia airport in December 2005, Davis said. The airport has 900 screeners, she said.
If convicted of the child pornography charges, Gordon, 46, faces a minimum mandatory sentence of five years. The maximum prison term is 250 years and the top fine is $3.2 million.
According to Janet Napolitano, the patdowns of 6-year-olds are done professionally. I wonder how many little kids Gordon was feeling up?
Nice to know this information was withheld from the public for a month, huh?
...come to think of it... we should hire more pederasts. it takes a pederast to catch a pederast... and Mohammad married Aisha when she was how old? and had sex with her... when she was how old? maybe we should hire nothing but Sex offenders. They seem to really understand things our leaders don't. TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE... you know?
Labels: Ertuğrul Apakan» Turkey» Unilateral» unilateralism
image via hurriyetusa.com
Referring to the Palestinian terrorism as "state-building efforts", Turkish envoy to UN said that Palestinians have thus proved they want to live in peace and deserve a state of their own.
(JPost) Turkey declared its support for Palestinian efforts to obtain UN recognition of statehood, according to a report published Saturday morning in the Turkish daily, Zaman.
According to the report, Turkish Ambassador to the UN Ertuğrul Apakan said, "The time has come to show solidarity with the Palestinians and help them to live in peace and dignity."
“Through their state building efforts, the Palestinian Authority has proven to all the skeptics that they deserve to attain their decades-long target of internationally recognized statehood, even though they continue to suffer under occupation,” Apakan was quoted as saying by Zaman.
The ambassador added that if the Palestinians show they are ready to move from current observer status at the UN to full statehood, the world "must not turn a blind eye to their just and legitimate appeal."
image via hurriyetusa.com
Labels: Chris Christie» Derek Fenton» Everybody Burn the Quran» New Jersey Transit
Remember Derek Fenton, the New Jersey transit worker who burned a few Koran pages in New York on his free time and got canned for it across the river by Christie's New Jersey Transit? Well there's a happy ending. Fenton has won back his job, damages and lost wages. The importance of this goes beyond Fenton, warning municipalities against this form of appeasement. Of course New Jersey decisionmakers probably think this brand of appeasement was cheap at the price.
This is what Fenton had to say
"Our government cannot pick and choose whose free speech rights are protected, based on whether or not they approve of the content of our statements or actions," Fenton said in a statement. "This is the very essence of the First Amendment."This is what Christie said at the time
The settlement comes after the governor publicly supported Fenton’s firing. In February, Christie said he didn’t ask for the dismissal but called it appropriate because "that kind of intolerance is ... unacceptable."Pick your conservative hero. via sultanknish.blogspot.com
"I knew he was going to be fired, and I had no problem with it," Christie said at the time. "And I still don’t have a problem with it."
Labels: Press TV
I've had the worst experience this week with PRESS TV. even when they don't talk about Israel they lie. I was hoping they were right about the story of King Abdullah buying facebook last month.... it turned out to be PRESSTV's story....but this is how you know the ad is a fake. why would they be advertising an old Subaru model? it doesn't say used cars... right? via presstv.ir
Labels: BBC» converting Muslims» Europe» Muslims
Pam Geller’s new poster vandalized by leftist, so sanctimonious she can’t even see why she was arrestedMona Eltahawy is a darling of the feminist progressive left. She was recently attacked in Egypt's Tahrir square. ...another left win...
well, good! This will allow the public to talk about Islam. The more free conversation on the issue the better. they can't frame the con...
it did work for Obama though. Remember Obama Girl? image from the South Florida Chronicle It_is_not_clear_where_or_how the g...
Answer: At the very least one feminist Secretary of State ( BENGHAZI EMAILS ) This afternoon the White House released 100 pages o...
Liberal multiculturalists insist that Islam is the same as other major world religions. As usual, they are full of shit.. The l...
the night before the Boston bombing (that we now know Obama was warned by the Russians about)... we saw a CNN video about the Oklahoma City ...
Lori Lowenthal Marcus, the founder of Z Street who filed a lawsuit against the IRS, notes that “the very first hearing in Z STREET...
A local Egyptian delivery company has been smuggling KFC meals through the underground tunnels across the Egypt-Gaza border, the Christi...
Israel Matzav: It's official: Government inquiry finds al-Dura 'killing' was a hoax
Nakoula Basseley Nakoula has been sitting in a US federal prison in Texas since his photographed midnight arrest by half a dozen deputy she...