SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: mph who wrote (1270)1/25/2005 10:09:08 AM
From: lorne  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224707
 
Lawmaker's Son Charged in Tire-Slashing
Jan 24, 6:46 PM (ET)
By GRETCHEN EHLKE
apnews.myway.com

MILWAUKEE (AP) - The sons of a first-term congresswoman and Milwaukee's former acting mayor were among five Democratic activists charged Monday with slashing the tires of vans rented by Republicans to drive voters and monitors to the polls on Election Day.

Sowande Omokunde, son of Rep. Gwen Moore, D-Wis., and Michael Pratt, the son of former Milwaukee acting mayor Marvin Pratt, were charged with criminal damage to property, a felony that carries a maximum punishment of 3 1/2 years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

The activists - all employees of the John Kerry campaign - are accused of flattening the tires on 25 vehicles rented by the state Republican Party to get out the vote and deliver poll watchers Nov. 2.

The GOP rented more than 100 vehicles that were parked in a lot adjacent to a Bush campaign office. The party planned to drive poll watchers to polling places by 7 a.m. and deliver any voters who didn't have a ride.

A criminal complaint said the defendants originally planned to put up Democratic yard signs, placards and bumper stickers at the Republican office in a scheme they called "Operation Elephant Takeover." But the plan was dropped when they learned a security guard was posted at the GOP office, the complaint said.

One witness told investigators the five defendants, dressed in "Mission Impossible" type gear, black outfits and knit caps, left the Democratic Party headquarters at about 3 a.m. on Nov. 2, and returned about 20 minutes later, extremely excited and talking about how they had slashed the tires.

Democratic Party of Wisconsin spokesman Seth Boffeli said the five were paid employees of Kerry's campaign, but were not acting on behalf of the campaign or party.

"This is not something we engage in, or encourage. We had to make it clear that this is something these individuals were doing on their own," Boffeli said.

Rick Wiley, state GOP executive director, discovered the vandalism on the morning of Election Day.

"It was unbelievable that people could stoop this low in a political campaign," he said. "I figured it had to be someone from the opposition. But I didn't think someone on the paid Kerry campaign would do this."

Wiley didn't say whether the vandalism prevented anyone from voting, but said poll watchers were about two hours late.

Moore attended the court appearance for her son, but declined to address the felony charge after the proceeding, saying only that she had to catch a plane. A message left on Marvin Pratt's cell phone was not immediately returned.

The judge denied a motion made by Omokunde's attorney, James Shellow, to dismiss the charges based on a flawed criminal complaint.

Also charged were Lewis Caldwell, Lavelle Mohammad, and Justin Howell.



To: mph who wrote (1270)1/26/2005 3:14:24 PM
From: Richnorth  Respond to of 224707
 
To continue with where I left off the other night, it is sociological changes
in the American landscape that have been responsible for a good number of
American men seeking wives from Asia. First off, gainful employment in
some public capacity or managing some private business has given many
a woman empowerment, liberty and independence. Gone are the days
when marriage is the only life insurance for her. And gone are the days when almost
all Americans listened to Bible-thumping preachers exhorting the women to be
ever nice and cooperative with their men. All this and Women's Lib, more
than anything else, have masculinized not a few women, thereby reducing
their overall appeal. Worse, some men are even in awe of them! And, more
than ever before, there are now more Asian women in America. I believe it is
erroneous to believe that the ever changing American culture, ever since the
end of WWII, has not been responsible in any way for many American men
seeking Asian wives here and elsewhere.

The masculinization of the American woman began, in part, I believe, with America's rampaging
trade deficits and burgeoning debt loads which has continued to fuel inflation despite government claims to the contrary. In turn, this has forced
many women into the workforce to help with meeting their families' financial obligations.
By the way, Reagan once bemoaned the fact that so many American women were working thereby
causing an apparent shortage of jobs. Women joining the workforce has no doubt spawned some
other sociological problems. But that is a topic for another day.

I have noticed that many a highly educated or professional woman has had
a hard time landing a suitable mate. By "a suitable mate" I mean a man
whose education, qualifications, interests and status are commensurate
with hers. Result: many women were obliged to marry men well below their
station, while others, in desperation, resort to having children by means of artificial insemination,
or simply remain single with a sigh of resignation. Or ever keep hoping and yearning patiently for her Prince Charming to show up some sweet day.
(BTW, this situation is not just peculiar to America. Even in Malaysia, which is just a stone's
throw away from the scene of the recent Tsunami, the person at the top in many a government
department or office is, more often than not, a female Malay university graduate and her husband
is very often the uneducated and the lowliest of peons in the same department! And, in neighbouring
Singapore, men tend to shun university-educated women like the plague! --- so much so that their government is very concerned regarding the ramifications arising from this.)

Needless to say, some American men seek women in Asia because they were simply disenchanted
or traumatized by some local women or they simply lack the necessary social skills, while other
men have some stigma of a criminal past to contend with and all that it implies. However, they
apparently believe they will likely to be successful with someone not of their own kind. This is not unlike what many women believe: a change of scenery, place and pace and clime might engender matrimonial prospects and happiness.

Oh, and by the way, many American men have found from experience that Asian women are less inhibited, by far, about sex unlike many American women who have been imbued with the idea that sex is dirty and unavoidable only for procreation's sake.



To: mph who wrote (1270)1/26/2005 4:43:46 PM
From: Richnorth  Respond to of 224707
 
Jews Have Debased American
& Jewish Culture - Rabbi

Our Worst Enemy


By Rabbi Daniel Lapin
President, Toward Tradition

1-24-5

I am an Orthodox Jewish rabbi sadly denouncing one of the box office hits of 2004. Which movie has earned my wrath? Here is a clue - it surprised everyone by selling over one hundred million dollars of tickets in its first week in theaters. No, it's not Mel Gibson's Passion. The movie causing me deep distress is a Rosenthal/Tenenbaum production starring Dustin Hoffman, and Barbra Streisand.

I was sorry to see Barbra Streisand involved in the flagrant defamation of Judaism found in this, her latest movie hit. While she was making her film Yentl, for which I served as a consultant, she studied Judaism regularly and diligently with me. She was a warm and gracious guest on the occasions she had dinner with my family. Yentl's nostalgic, if not altogether authentic glimpse into 19th century Jewish life in Poland, evoked a feeling of fondness for the characters, but like many ethnic Jews, Streisand is largely isolated from her religious roots. In the new film to which I refer, she plays not a role, but a heinous caricature of a Jewess.

I am reluctant to name the movie on account of the implied vulgarity of its title. If you are reluctant to part with good money for the privilege of seeing the Jewish people being defamed, you should abstain from this movie. In spite of having several Jewish producers and several Jewish stars, this film's vile notions of Jews are not too different from those used by Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbels.

I may be unsophisticated but I am not just a grouch with no sense of humor. I'll fess up; I really enjoy funny movies. However you should know a little about this offensive excuse for entertainment. You might recall that in the first movie we followed Pam Byrnes as she introduced her very Jewish and nerdy boyfriend, Greg, to her parents. This sequel shows the Byrnes visiting their daughter's future in-laws. The movie depicts Greg's conspicuously Jewish parents as sexually obsessed, constantly concupiscent degenerates. Nice people, but depraved. Their home is filled with bric-a-brac that juts with anatomic suggestiveness.

Along with their son's bar mitzvah talit, or prayer shawl, they have preserved the foreskin from his circumcision. To add to the hilarity, this souvenir makes a distasteful reappearance at an awkward moment. In reality, Jews treat the foreskin with reverence and bury it rather than turning it into a scrapbook joke. The hosts, who never miss an opportunity of exuding Jewish ethnicity, boast of their son losing his virginity to the gentile maid and they keep their guests waiting while they themselves practice what they preach in their bedroom upstairs. There are many more vile examples of Jewish people being defamed in this horrible excrescence. I am not sure that labeling it comedy excuses the defamation.

I do not particularly care for dark, socially significant films. Give me funny movies like The Blues Brothers and Hopscotch. However I really loathe movies that perpetuate hideous stereotypes about racial, religious, or ethnic groups, no matter how funny they may seem. What is more, I cannot see how racial bigotry is lessened if perpetrated by blacks or that anti-Semitism is diminished if delivered by Jews.


This movie defames Jews in a way that I haven't seen since the worst that Woody Allen dished up. And Woody at his worst was breathtakingly hostile to Judaism. One need only recall how many of Woody's films portray Jews, not to mention rabbis, as loathsome liars, desperate psychotics, pathetic perverts, and ridiculously lecherous losers. If Woody Allen were not Jewish, surely every Jewish organization would have roundly denounced him. And they would have been right. The problem is that he is Jewish and they don't denounce him. Instead, we self-destructive Jews celebrate Woody Allen Week at Jewish Community Center film festivals.

It is not only in movies that Jews besmirch Jews as sexualizing the culture. Ruth Westheimer told The New York Times of her love for Judaism, Israel, and the Jewish people. Meanwhile, as Dr. Ruth, with her grandmotherly appearance and her high-pitched Jewish accent, she titillates her audiences with shockingly explicit sexual advice.

Radio shock-jock Howard Stern intersperses his displays of dehumanizing depravity with a constant stream of "Oy veys" as if subconsciously compelled to highlight his Jewish ethnicity.

Jerry Springer, widely known as the Jewish former mayor of Cincinnati, normalizes depravity by projecting a deviant sub-culture and its cheering hooligans right into America's living room.

A few years ago, the Los Angeles Jewish Journal gushingly profiled a Jewish pornographer whose stage name is Ron Jeremy. The piece praised the huge sums he's been paid to "bed more gorgeous women than James Bond." Jeremy, who proudly admits to have acted in or directed over 1,500 porn videos, cited the preponderance of Jewish men in porn and explained, "Jewish families tend to be more liberal than Christian ones, they aren't obsessed by the fear of the devil or going to hell." As if to eliminate any lingering doubt about Ron Jeremy's Jewishness, the Jewish Journal breathlessly assures us that Ron Jeremy plans to marry in a synagogue.

You'd have to be a recent immigrant from Outer Mongolia not to know of the role that people with Jewish names play in the coarsening of our culture. Almost every American knows this. It is just that most gentiles are too polite to mention it.

Naturally, I am not suggesting that Americans of Jewish descent should conceal their ethnic identity. I am urging those for whom Judaism is a link to the eternal values of Sinai, to wake up and realize how other Americans increasingly perceive us. Furthermore we ought to recognize that this unwholesome perception of Jews is the result of anti-Semitism perpetrated by Jews rather than by non-Jews. It would seem that Isaiah's twenty-eight hundred year old prophecy to the Jewish people has come true today - "Those that destroy you and those that wreck you go forth from thee." (Isaiah 49:17)

By now, some Jewish readers will be cringing. You might be cursing me for making public the role of Jews in debasing the culture. Perhaps you subscribe to the notion that nobody has noticed. I sympathize and want you to know that I write about it only for the purpose of trying to solve the problem. Make no mistake, it is a problem, and the solution lies not in attempting to defame the critics, but in stepping forward to criticize the defamers. Indeed, if we Jews do not ourselves condemn the wrong that our brethren do, others with less sympathy eventually will do so.

This excerpt from Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf shows how that evil megalomaniac roused his nation to hurl an avalanche of destruction at the Jewish people:

"Was there any form of filth or profligacy, particularly in cultural life, without at least one Jew involved in it? What had to be reckoned heavily against the Jews in my eyes was when I became acquainted with their activity in the press, art, literature, and the theater... It sufficed to look at a billboard, to study the names behind the horrible trash they advertised... Is this why the Jews are called the "chosen people"? The fact that nine tenths of all literary filth, artistic trash, and theatrical idiocy can be set to the account of a people, constituting hardly one hundredth of all the country's inhabitants, could simply not be talked away; it was the plain truth." (Mein Kampf, Adolf Hitler, Chapter II)

It does not excuse Hitler or his Nazi thugs for us to acknowledge that this maniacal, master propagandist focused on a reality that resonated with the educated, and cultured Germans of his day. Not once in Mein Kampf did that monster charge Jews with being complicit in the killing of Christ two thousand years earlier. He knew that long-ago event, shrouded in mystery and theological profundity, would never goad enlightened people to murder. Instead, he drew attention to the obvious and inescapable; that which every German knew to be true.

The sad fact is that through Jewish actors, playwrights, and producers, the Berlin stage of Weimar Germany linked Jews and deviant sexuality in all its sordid manifestations just as surely as Broadway does today. Much of the filth in American entertainment today parallels that of Germany between the wars.

About twenty years ago, one of Ayn Rand's proteges, Leonard Peikoff, wrote a book called The Ominous Parallels in which he described how Germany's cultural decline helped bring the Nazis to power. With haunting precision, Peikoff proves how similar is America's cultural decline. I am not predicting vicious anti-Semitism in America but I am suggesting that most decent Americans today feel more viscerally outraged by the assault on decency than by the Crucifixion.

Bill Cosby rightly condemned black entertainment that hatefully glorifies destructive behavior. By contrast, Barbershop, the 2002 movie starring Icecube, and Cedric the Entertainer, limned a loving portrait of a hard-working African-American family valiantly struggling to achieve nobility in the face of formidable challenge. In the same year, Nia Vardalos did her hilarious My Big Fat Greek Wedding, clearly demonstrating her love for her warm-hearted and decent relatives. Contrarily, we Jews routinely depict ourselves in repugnant caricatures of people you'd want nothing to do with in real life. Why do my colleagues in Jewish communal leadership never condemn this anti-Semitism? For if it is not anti-Semitism, what is?

Ah, but wait. The leader of a famous Jewish defense organization that exists to stop the defamation of the Jewish people, recently denounced, in The Jerusalem Post, one of the most profitable movies of 2004 for its "vile notions of Jews." Reluctant to "contribute to the overflowing coffers" of the producers by encouraging attendance, he nonetheless insisted that "only by viewing it can one understand how offensive it is."

Was he describing the horrible sequel I am refusing to name? Sadly, not. He was referring to Mel Gibson's The Passion. Nearly a year after its release, and after polls show increased regard for Jews among the film's audiences, Jewish organizations still condemn The Passion as defamatory to Jews. Yet, astonishingly, they don't consider the examples I cite above as defamatory to Jews.

Here is a simple question: Do you suppose that people's view of what Jews are really like is shaped more by Caius, an obscure two-thousand-year old character in The Passion or alternatively by the contemporary couple played by Streisand and Hoffman? Which movie more egregiously defames Jews? Consider the meaning of the word 'defame.' To de-fame means to undo the fame currently being enjoyed. Jews used to be known for having endowed the world with the notion of sexual restraint and modesty. Judaism is now being defamed by Jews.

Inexplicably, nearly a year after its release and without a shred of proof that anyone thinks the worse of Jews on its account, The Passion continues to trouble some Jewish leaders. Hinting that their real target was Mel Gibson the religious conservative, rather than Mel Gibson the defamer of Judaism, a Jewish leader last week criticized Gibson for opposing the changes in Catholic teaching advocated by the Vatican II council. This is tantamount to a Christian leader criticizing an Orthodox Jew for opposing the acceptance of homosexuality advocated by the leadership of Reform Judaism. The only word for this is "Chutzpah" - indescribable impudence.

For years the same Jewish leader has ignored Jews who flagrantly and fraudulently defame Judaism but he incessantly continues to condemn Mel Gibson. He fails to realize that it is his exaggerated attacks on Mel Gibson, whose movie recently took top honors at the 31st annual People's Choice Awards, that do considerable harm to American Jews, not the film itself. Apparently Jews may behave outrageously while Christians, however, will be held to a higher standard. This abolition of honest objectivity lays the foundation for a frightening form of censorship and arbitrary prosecution. It would surely cause the most cynical KGB commissar of the bad old days to drool with envy.

A paramount principle of paleontology is that failure to adapt is a symptom of impending extinction. Anachronistically obsessing on yesterday's dangers blinds one to contemporary perils. It is true that in the past, mobs of European Catholics did murder Jews. That has never happened in this most philo-Semitic of countries. American Jews are not threatened by rampaging Christians seeking revenge for the blood of Christ. However Jews are threatened by other forces against which we have precious few allies. Prominent among our allies are seriously religious, and for the most part, conservative Christians.

When will more Jewish leaders learn who their friends really are? When will they learn that those who incessantly bludgeon their friends eventually won't have any friends left?

It would be foolish not to realize that most decent Americans are bothered far more by the trashing of American culture today than they are by our possible complicity in the killing of Christ two thousand years ago. Because so many of the most prominent trashers possess Jewish names and proudly proclaim their Jewish ethnicity, it becomes a Jewish responsibility to condemn the vulgarity by means of which they defame Judaism.

We can't stop the Woody Allens and Howard Sterns, and in a nation that enshrined free speech, maybe we oughtn't to try. However we could redeem ourselves by protesting them instead of dissipating valuable energies and priceless goodwill by endlessly protesting The Passion.

- Rabbi Daniel Lapin is the president of Toward Tradition, a national coalition of Christians and Jews defending the Judeo-Christian values vital for our culture.

towardtradition.org



To: mph who wrote (1270)1/27/2005 1:47:17 PM
From: lorne  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 224707
 
The enemy.

Jordan's dilemma over 'honour killings'

By Clare Murphy
BBC News Online
Wednesday, 10 September, 2003,
news.bbc.co.uk

"A woman is like an olive tree. When its branch catches woodworm, it has to be chopped off so that society stays clean and pure."
So declared one tribal leader when pressed on the issue of "honour killings" in Jordan, where approximately every two weeks a woman is killed by a male relative because of the shame she has brought upon her family by an alleged sexual transgression - "sins" which include being raped.

Her killer will, on average, receive a sentence of some six months' imprisonment.

Latest efforts to impose a harsher penalty on men who kill their daughters and sisters suffered a fresh setback in parliament this week, after deputies refused to sanction an amendment to the penal code.

The day after parliament sat, three brothers hacked to death their two sisters with axes "to cleanse the family honour".

Parliament's failure to approve the amendment is likely to be a disappointment for Jordan's King Abdullah, who is keen to present his country to the outside world as a pioneering model for reform and a beacon of moderate Islam.

It is widely agreed that the root and cause of honour killing is a complex, historical phenomenon which has no justification in Islam's holy book, the Koran, and which has also been known to occur elsewhere in the world and among other religions.

Nonetheless, it is the insistence within Islamic culture of the need to preserve women's purity - and the disgrace that any stain on this purity may bring upon the family - that appears to be making it so tough in Jordan to stamp out the crime and to bring their perpetrators to court on murder charges.

Identity issues

The issue was poignantly brought to international attention earlier this year with the publication of the book Forbidden Love by Norma Khouri, who wrote a tribute to her best friend Dalia - killed by her father in Amman after she started an affair with a Christian boy.

Dalia's case may have focused minds, but since her death dozens of other women have been killed at the hands of fathers and brothers.

Those found guilty of such killings rarely receive sentences longer than one year, and many serve terms of one month. They tend to be sentenced under legislation which reduces sentences for crimes committed in a "fit of rage" sparked by an "unlawful action" on the part of the victim.

According to campaigning journalist Rana Husseini, actions such as leaving the family home for a period, or uttering words such as "This is my life. I am free to do as I choose" were all considered unlawful acts in verdicts on honour killings issued last year.

The killer is a victim as much as the victim herself - it is so hard to understand the extent of the social, cultural and traditional pressures on these men

Rana Husseini
Campaigner
For the deputies who rejected the amendments, invoking harsher punishments against the perpetrators threatens the very fabric of conservative Jordanian society. Lenient sentencing, they argue, dissuades women from committing "sin" in the first place.

"It's also a question of culture and identity," says Adab Saoud, one of six female deputies who holds her seat thanks to a royal-imposed quota and one of the MPs who voted against the bill.

"Obviously these killings are wrong and against our religion. But the notion of honour is a very important one in our society. And we need to accept that."

Ms Husseini agrees that Jordan's cultural identity is proving a sticking point in the campaign to change the law.

"One of the main problems with the debate over the past few years are the terms which were set. It was suggested parliament should look at this because Jordan was being criticised by the West.

"It was the wrong way to present it, because it seemed as though the West was being allowed to impose itself on our sovereign affairs. And that got people's backs up. "

Victimhood

Curiously, when it comes to determining who is ultimately to blame for the killing of young women by their male relatives, there is reluctance to point the finger at the men themselves.

"I know it would be much simpler and easier if there were certain types of men who did this," said Norma Khouri shortly after her book was published. "But Dalia's father was not a cruel monster - in many ways, he was a typical Arab man, just like my dad."

Ms Husseini goes as far as talking about the men as being themselves "victims".

"It is so hard to understand the extent of the social, cultural and traditional pressures on these men. They are constantly told the family honour is at stake, they are virtually blackmailed."

Female relatives also play a role in the murder of their daughters, sisters and nieces.

Many do so because they are scared they will be tarred with the same brush if they refuse to co-operate, others because they too believe the family honour has been disgraced.

Rania Arafat, who lived in Amman, might have turned 27 this year if her two aunts had not turned up at her door one morning to say they had arranged a secret meeting with her boyfriend, with whom she had been conducting an illicit affair.

When the three arrived at the supposed rendezvous point, the aunts stepped aside and Rania was shot in the head by her brother.