Check out this nugget on the McKinney campaign buried at the end of a story in today's Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
Several people dressed in black suits and boots followed McKinney around. The patches on their clothes said: "New Black Panther Party Freedom or Death." The organization does not have an official role in McKinney's campaign and are not on her organization's payroll, said McKinney's campaign manager, John Evans.
So members of the "largest organized anti-Semitic black militant group in America" just show up spontaneously to follow McKinney around during the final hours of her campaign? This woman is nothing if not a predictable disgrace.
You'll remember that during the waning, desperate days of McKinney's last primary loss to Denise Majette, Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan magically appeared for a rally in the 4th district . Farrakhan wasn't "officially" there on behalf of the McKinney campaign either, of course, though I believe he encouraged people to vote for her. Just another rabidly anti-Semitic coincidence, I guess.
And who can forget the famous remarks by Cynthia's father, Billy McKinney, who blamed her loss on the fact that "Jews have bought everybody. Jews. J-E-W-S."
By the way, it may be that the anti-Semitic appeal doesn't pack as much of a punch as it used to, because Billy was back on the op-ed pages of the Atlanta Progressive News this weekend claiming that it isn't the "J-E-W-S" who are pulling the strings orchestrating the revolt against his daughter - this time around it's the "R-E-P-U-B-L-I-C-A-N-S."
#4
Atlanta Progressive News
APN) DECATUR US Congresswoman McKinney (D-GA) wowed a progressive audience here at the packed Push Push Theater during a forum following a screening of the film American Blackout. You are like a Malcolm X, one audience member said.
Ah, not to seem pushy or anything, but I'm still waiting for my money. Does anyone here know who I should be talking with to get my "Bought and Paid for by Dem Joooos" check?
#6
You'll get your check the same day I get notified of the monthly meeting of the 'vast right-wing conspiracy'. Must be the J-E-W-S intercepting my mail.
#7
An add from the Atlanta Progressive News. Something McKinney might wish to consider.
Mental Stimulation . . . for the restless mind.
Welcome to MENTAL STIMULATION!
We are happy to announce that we have finally moved into our new location at 308 West Ponce de Leon Avenue (pronounced Ponce de Leeeeon), between Levi's Fish House and Cafe Lily. We are in the former location of The Final Touch.
We still offer the same great selection of films that you can either rent or buy. (Only three dollars for five days.) We still have used books as well as current ones.
And, of course, our fascinating line of cool toys sets us apart from other stores. Come by and visit us soon, or give us a call at 404 378-4113 or 404 377-5620.
#8
Well, she couldn't exactly run around with the Democrat's old militant wing. So she's replaced the Klan with the Panthers; the threat of violence is the same.
Posted by: Robert Crawford ||
08/07/2006 19:18 Comments ||
Top||
Looks like the last chance for India to lift itself out of the toilet has been swept away....
For a person to convert to Christ, he must have the government sign over that he can convert to Christ. In other words, there is no freedom of religious choice in India, per Compass Direct News. One has to bow down to the government officialdom first; otherwise, he sets himself up for persecution.
Persecution against Christians is a daily occurrence in India. Now it will increase. In Madbya Pradesh north-central state, the state lawmakers passed the statute "making stricter the 'anti-conversion' law that has increased persecution of Christians."
#1
Nearly all of Asia is reverting to more primitive life forms-those that think they can dictate religious belief. Next come the Asian Inquisitions. Wonder how many decades those will last?
#2
Of course, the reason the law was passed in the first place was because children and young women were being kidnapped, and *forcibly* converted to Islam before being sold as slaves.
The kidnappers were doing a full court press on them, indoctrinations and beatings, and getting them to sign documents swearing that their conversion wasn't forced.
#3
The laws ban forcible conversion and conversion influenced by supply of money and food etc.
Posted by: john ||
08/07/2006 17:48 Comments ||
Top||
#4
John, you often have good posts-maybe you can link to an article that explains how this only about forced conversions. This article can lead to an entirely different conclusion.
What's the story with the Post Chronicle, Unong?
Posted by: Jules in the Hinterlands ||
08/07/2006 18:58 Comments ||
Top||
#5
No law can just ban conversions. This would violate the Indian constitution and the Indian supreme court would strike it down.
Several states have laws that ban forcible and induced conversions.
There are groups that will encourage local police to harass missionaries now that they have the law.
They have zero chance of actually getting a convistion, because they would have to prove coercion or monetary inducement but they'll probably still try.
Posted by: john ||
08/07/2006 19:13 Comments ||
Top||
#6
This is a pretty old law - dating from 1968.
The Madhya Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act of 1968 aims to prevent religious conversions by force or allurement.
The amendment passed (requiring 1 months notice) probably violates the Indian constitution. The state governor will probably refuse to sign it (as happened in Rajasthan state) and it still has to survive the Indian supreme court.
Posted by: john ||
08/07/2006 19:17 Comments ||
Top||
#1
Nasrallah, however, has sided with Moqtada Sadr, an Iraqi junior mullah who has tried to undermine Sistani's position in Najaf, so far unsuccessfully. (Nasrallah and Sadr are distant cousins.)
That explains a lot. Small world, isn't it?
Posted by: Bobby ||
08/07/2006 16:03 Comments ||
Top||
#2
I'm obit scanning everyday, checking on Moqtada Sadr.
#3
What a non-story. A debate on what will pass for victory for Hezb. In my opinion, anything but annihilation is a hezb victory.
Some realistic negotiation points:
1. Islam have been poisoning the minds of it's young against joooos and America and modern life, among other things. Therefore, this must end.
2. This brainwashing is done in their schools.
3. The average muzzie does not know what is a fact in our world and what is a lie that he is forced to believe. This too must end.
4. Islam believes that death is the penalty for not believing in Islam. This too must end.
So, my recommendation of a point that must be won in negotiations ? That Islam stop teaching Islam and that all who practice it submit to psychological examinations to determine how dangerous they may still be until cured. Further that Islam forgive and honor Israel and joooos and America and modern lifestyle. And that Islam preach that accepting what other people do without hateful judgement is the desired behavior for all muzzies. And finally that Islam urge it's followers to get outside educations which are not faith based, but fact based.
In other words, fight them and kill them until they are gone. Bomb their mosques, burn their korans, free their women and children, and remove Islam from the face of the earth.
A few hours after a Franco-American draft for a UN Security Council resolution was released, pro-Hezbollah lobbies and allies launched a campaign to hijack the response of Lebanon to the United Nations. As noted by seasoned observers the campaign started at the top with an alert release by News Agency Reuters written by Lin Noueihed. The article, put out early Sunday has reached the four corners of the Globe and its title has framed the position of the Lebanese people in a "no" to the UN expected resolution.
Amazingly enough, Lin Noueihid titles her release "Lebanon rejects draft UN resolution." But when you read the release you realize that the "representative" of all of Lebanon in the eyes of the Reuters reporter is no one other than pro-Syrian, Hezbollah ally, Nabih Berri, the leader of Shiite Movement Amal. Basing her entire report on one of the most powerful supporters of the Syrian occupation and who heads a militia allied to Hezbollah, Noueihid gives Berri the full power of the credibility of Reuters. This title will find itself printed from Yahoo to the last local newsletter in the Fidji islands.
Evidently, local editors around the world trust Reuters as they trust the Red Cross, and will conclude that indeed "Lebanon" has rejected a UN resolution, while in reality, it is Tehran-Damascus-Hezbollah axis that rejected it, and unfortunately a Reuters writer framed it otherwise. But leaders of the civil society, NGOs, members of Parliament and cadres from the Cedars Revolution said just the opposite.
Reuters quotes Berri stating that "their resolution will either drop Lebanon into internal strife or will be impossible to implement," which in fact reveals his intents and those of Hezbollah: If the UN resolution is voted Hezbollah and its allies will attack the Lebanese Government and the Cedars Revolution
Commenting from Beirut, Human Rights activist and Cedars Revolution Human Rights officer Kamal Batal said the "Reuters framing of Lebanon's answer to the UN is a hijacking of the opinions of millions of Lebanese. The popular majority in Lebanon wants to end the War now and the disbanding of all militias," he said.
Analyzing Reuters' release closely George Chaya, Director for the Lebanese Information Office for Latin America in Buenos Aires said "it is not really a coincidence that Lin Nouaihid twisted realities and induced millions of readers around the world into error in perception. From a thorough review of Nouaihid's previous campaigns through Reuters and other media, you can easily see her framings in the Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Koran affairs in addition to her postings on radical web sites. Nouaihid has all the freedom to express her ideological positions but Reuters credibility as a fair and professional news agency are now damaged."
In fact the Lebanese Government of Fouad Seniora has stated that the UN draft doesn't meet their requirements of a real solution. Seniora and his colleagues wanted a stronger UN resolution that would help Lebanon regain its control of its land. Berri's position is different: he is opposed to any UN resolution that would give Lebanon's army international support to disarm the militia.
Lebanon's framing is not new. During the long and terrible wars of Lebanon from 1975 until 2000, writers in news agencies and journalists such as Jonathan Randall, Thierry DesJardins, Robert Fisk and others sculpted the perception of Lebanon at their discretion and often against the thinking process of Lebanon's popular majority.
Dr Walid Phares is a Senior Fellow with the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a Visiting Fellow with the European Foundation for Democracies.
#4
Reuters is about to drop dead. This will be the fastest death among the MSM ever recorded. It took decades for CBS to turn cold. Reuters death could mark the beginning of a new era.
#5
Amazingly enough, Lin Noueihid titles her release
Traditionally, newswire reporters simply submit their articles and their editors are responsible to assign headlines as well as edit content. Furthermore, independent news organizations that hold subscriptions to newswire feeds are under no obligation to use the original headline and can edit for content by omitting some of information.
If you think those "Click It or Ticket" seat belt enforcement drives are all about your safety, give it another think. State and local law enforcement agencies have a huge financial incentive to dole out as many tickets as they possibly can -- in order to qualify for the federal grant boodle dangled before their noses like a savory pork chop in front of a hungry blue tick hound.
The more tickets they write, the more money they get -- and each year, the prize gets fatter. Successful departments (those that crank out the most tickets) qualify for ever-larger handouts of taxpayer dollars -- in order more thoroughly to fleece those very same taxpayers via trumped-up traffic charges that have grow ever more penny-ante as the years roll on. Literally millions of dollars are being spent -- at a time of mammoth federal deficits, the huge fiscal strain of a war on terror and burdensome federal taxes -- to use law enforcement as 9 millimeter-packing nannies ensuring we're "buckled-up for safety."
California alone went through $2.6 million this year to fund its May 15-June 4 "Click It or Ticket" dragnet. This in a state with a huge crime problem (real crime; you know, murders, rapes, assaults and that kind of stuff) and a teeter-tottering fiscal situation that, you'd think, would call for austerity and reordering of priorities to the essentials. Do "seat belt checkpoints" qualify? What about it, Ahhnoold?
The same situation obtains in other states as well. The federal Department of Transportation aggressively markets its nation-wide "Click It or Ticket" grant program to every state in the land -- including gaudy (and sort-of Plah Doh-style softly fascistic) TV commercials in which infantilized motorists are given an in loco parentis browbeating by Johnny Law before being issued the obligatory piece of payin' paper.
The late conservative intellectual Sam Francis came up with an excellent term for all of this stuff -- "anarcho-tyranny." In brief, he meant a situation in which the truly lawless (violent criminals, big-time crooks) are increasingly treated with kid gloves while at the same time, ordinary schlubs who never commit serious personal or property crimes are increasingly hassled over Pecksniffy technical fouls and "lifestyle violations" such as failing to wear their seat belts.
Invariably, the punishment involves money.
The reasoning and motives are easy enough to understand. Real criminals are potentially dangerous, after all; John Q. driving along unbuckled in his family van almost never is. The first might put up a fight -- and will often try to run. If caught, he certainly has no money in wallet -- so what's in it for the Feds? But John Q. has a job. His wallet, credit cards. He will be fined.
"Click It -- or Ticket"!
IT OUGHT TO BUG US (we John Q's) that with child molesters and serial killers splattering their hideous deeds all over the TV nearly every day, with violent gangbangers penetrating even formerly quiet suburbs, millions of dollars and untold hours' worth of law-enforcement time is being used to make sure we're wearing our seat belts. But it doesn't.
And it ought to infuriate us that, at a time of alarming federal and state budget deficits and a groaning tax load on the average middle class American, our leaders see fit to expend millions upon millions of dollars on nationwide, dragnet-style enforcement campaigns directed not at public menaces, not at desperate needs -- but rather, at folks whose only crime is having the temerity not to "buckle up."
It doesn't.
Part of the reason may be that many of us have come to accept a level of do-gooder busy-bodyism in our lives that would have appalled our grandfathers. We're as passive as Ned "we don't want any trouble here" Beatty. Not content to live our own lives as we see fit, according to our own lights -- and to extend the same courtesy to our neighbors -- we increasingly feel obliged to cram our notions of what's "safe" and "proper" down the gullets of our fellows. (You might call this the HOA Fuhrer Syndrome writ large; i.e., the stretch-pants-wearing neighborhood termagant who loves to waddle around with her clipboard noting violations of the HOA rulebooks transposed onto society at large.)
Another is that that we've accepted much of the propaganda fed to us about seat belts -- which can injure a motorist as well as save his life. One study found that seat belts cause injuries 10-30 percent of the time. Seat belt-caused aortal tears are not common -- but they do occur. There is no question that people have actually died as a result of wearing a seat belt.
Without question, seat belts can save lives -- and usually do. But not always. So shouldn't the choice to wear or not to wear be ours to make?
The same issue obtains with air bags -- which have caused scores of deaths and, literally, thousands of injuries ranging from minor to severe. Yet the government has arrogated to itself the right to make a potentially life or death choice for us -- and for many of us, against our will. (And at our expense; air bags have added anywhere from $400 to $1,000 or more per car since they became mandatory.)
BUT THE REAL BOTTOM LINE with "Click It or Ticket" is the precedent it (and programs like it) sets for government meddling in areas where the individual was (formerly, anyhow) sovereign. If the government can make us buckle up for safety, why not issue tickets to sedentary people for failing to maintain an ideal body-mass index? How about mandatory jumping jacks each morning -- monitored by cameras in our homes, with tickets issued to "cardiac fitness scofflaws"? After all, being overweight and sedentary have clear-cut health and well-being consequences every bit as severe (indeed, more so) than failing to wear one's seat belt. The former, for example, is a real and definite risk -- the latter, at best a theoretical one. A person could go his whole life without buckling up and suffer no adverse consequences and impose no costs on "society." But eat a pound of bacon every day, smoke two packs and put on 50 pounds of excess blubber -- and you will absolutely suffer health ill-effects. And "society" will get the tab.
Perhaps a ticket-writing campaign (and many federal dollars) is in order. All those blubber-powers need to be protected against the consequences of their risky and dangerous behavior. Don't you agree? If it's good for the (seat belt) goose, it's good for the big-boy gander, eh?
#1
I suspect the wave of the future will be what I call the "Singapore solution". In Singapore, they give out fines for every damn thing. Every impropriety, every nuisance, every annoyance. They only put you in jail for something dangerous or serious.
Not just typical offenses, either. Just being rude and impolite will get you fined. Spitting on the sidewalk, leaving gum where you shouldn't, urinating in elevators (strangely popular there), shoplifting, graffitti, disorderly conduct, panhandling, etc., etc., etc.
This is far more cost effective than putting people in jail for any time less than six months.
And even if you can't pay, you can work until your fine is paid off.
Every cop carries a ticket book and issues citations like there is no tomorrow. It forces everyone to be polite, or else.
If you think about it, it makes sense in the modern world. Jails are for people who can't control themselves, but aren't really awful; not for the pestiferous, who today just get away with it.
Plus, if you issue enough fines, it actually pays for the jails and prisons.
You don't want to wear that seat belt, just make sure you got plenty of cash to pay for the emergency room, overtime for the officers who have to block off traffic and do the investigation to prove you're a dumbass (incidentally, taking them away from solving real crimes, like the author of this piece bitches about), and money for the paramedics (usually firefighters) who could have been off putting out fires instead of extricating your fat ass out of your car. And if you live, don't forget the rehab costs where they will teach you yet again how to stack blocks, tie your shoes, and maneuver around in your wheelchair.
I've been to enough damn accidents that didn't have to be so bloody and gory, thank you very much. They wouldn't have been if the idiots just put on the stupid seat belt. Yes, I got paid, and got paid well for my trouble. And it all came out of the taxpayers' pockets. Thank you all.
It always amazed me how many morons thought they were going to just shoot out the windshield and land on something soft (in Arizona, where every single native plant has stickers or spines of some sort...good luck, moron), or that asphalt has some "give" to it when you hit it at 40 mph.
Don't go shouting about how your "civil rights" are being violated when I have to pay with my taxes for your stupid, irresponsible behavior.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Check out this nugget on the McKinney campaign buried at the end of a story in today's Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 
By Eric Peters 
