Saturday, July 31, 2010

Wikileaks Controversy: A Revenge Quest?

This just in courtesy of MSNBC

LONDON — Bradley Manning, the prime suspect in the leaking of the Afghan war files, raged against his  Army employers and "society at large" on his Facebook page in the days before he allegedly downloaded thousands of secret memos, a U.K. newspaper reported Saturday.
The U.S. Army intelligence analyst, who is half British and went to school in Wales, U.K., appeared to sink into depression after a relationship break-up, the Daily Telegraph said. It quoted Manning as posting he didn't "have anything left" and was "beyond frustrated."
In an apparent swipe at the Army, Manning also wrote: "Bradley Manning is not a piece of equipment," and quoted a joke about "military intelligence" being an oxymoron, the Telegraph said.
The Facebook revelations come as The New York Times reported that Army investigators were broadening their inquiry about the recent disclosure of classified military information to include Manning's friends and associates who may have helped the alleged leaker.

Mr. Manning has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, and so I will honor that by no assuming his guilt.  But if he is guilty, this is a shocking revelation.

The whole Wikileaks controversy could be the result of one Army soldier who had a grudge and was looking to get back at the world for whatever reason.  The lives of American servicemen are now at great risk, as news reports of the Taliban threatening to target those named in the leaks indicates.  To do something like this simply to get back at someone is not only wrong, it's absolutely reprehensible.

Again, this would only be true if Manning is guilty, and since that has not been established yet, I will not attempt to presume it.  But I must say this; if this turns out to be true, Wikileaks is doing a great disservice to this country by continuing to publish the leaked documents, thereby ensuring great danger for American servicemen in Afghanistan.

Friday, July 30, 2010

RIP Father Carlos Wotto

From CNA via Father Z's blog:

Catholic priest found dead in Mexico

Mexico City, Mexico, Jul 30, 2010 / 02:02 pm (CNA/Europa Press).- Local authorities have reported that a priest, Fr. Carlos Salvador Wotto, was found dead at the parish of Our Lady of the Snows in Oaxaca, Mexico. Signs of torture were evident on the priest’s body.

The 83-year-old Fr. Wotto was found bound and gagged inside his office. He had a bag over his head and cigarette burns on various parts of his body. Authorities have not ruled out that Fr. Wotto died from asphyxiation nor that the motive was robbery.

José Barragán, spokesman for the Archdiocese of Antequera confirmed that the priest’s body showed signs of torture. However, Barragán would release no further details. “We must wait until the investigation is concluded. Any commentary would be irresponsible.”

“We are all shocked,” he told the Mexican daily, La Jornada.

Several parishioners reported that they were waiting for the priest to arrive to celebrate the 6 p.m. Mass at the parish, which is located in the heart of the city. When the priest did not show up, they went to his office to search for him. It was there that they found his body.

A woman, who asked not to be identified, swore that shortly after 5 p.m. someone showed up at the priest’s office to give him a jello dessert. When the person knocked, Fr. Wotto responded through the closed door and asked that the dessert be left outside his office

Please pray for the soul of this priest, and the conversion of his murderer or murderers.  Whoever did this was sick in the heart and needs the grace of Jesus Christ badly.

O God, Thou didst raise Thy servant, Fr. Carlos Salvador Wotto, to the sacred priesthood of Jesus Christ, according to the Order of Melchisedech, giving him the sublime power to offer the Eternal Sacrifice, to bring the Body and Blood of Thy Son Jesus Christ down upon the altar, and to absolve the sins of men in Thine own Holy Name. We beseech Thee to reward his faithfulness and to forget his faults, admitting him speedily into Thy Holy Presence, there to enjoy forever the recompense of his labors. This we ask through Jesus Christ Thy Son, our Lord. Amen.  

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

Life Site: Gov. Christie Vetoes Millions to Planned Parenthood

Courtesy of Life Site News:

By Peter J. Smith
TRENTON, New Jersey, July 26, 2010 ( – As New Jersey’s Republican Governor Chris Christie continues to fulfill a campaign pledge to restore state government to fiscal sanity, he has vetoed a bill that would have dedicated $7.5 million in state to “family planning” clinics, most of which are run by Planned Parenthood.
New Jersey’s Star Ledger reported that Christie in his veto message said that “the state simply cannot fund every worthy program” and would not restore $7.5 million for family planning clinics that he had cut from the state’s budget for fiscal year 2011.
Marie Tasy, executive director of New Jersey Right to Life, praised Christie for standing by his decision to cut funds for Planned Parenthood.
“The taxpayers of New Jersey are under no obligation to fund the radical and failed social agenda of Planned Parenthood,’’ said Marie Tasy, according to the Star-Ledger. “We commend Governor Christie for his steadfast opposition to restoring these funds.”
Christie issued the veto along with vetoes of two bills that would have established a $100 million tax credit program for new homebuyers, and redirected government funds to enroll 39,000 low-income individuals in the state’s subsidized health insurance program.
"State spending has been reset to levels the taxpayers can afford,” said Christie in a stern message to the legislature. “Supplemental spending that would return to the unchecked spending and out of control budget shortfalls of the past will not make it past the Governor's desk."
Reports indicate that the Democrat-controlled Legislature may seek to mount a veto-override. 

A major CIVAB kudos to Gov. Christie for vetoing taxpayer funds that would have gone to this vile organization.

Sunday, July 25, 2010

Life Site: Augusta State Uni. Student Ordered to Change Beliefs or Face Expulsion

Straight from out of the Orwell Files, courtesy of Life Site News:

AUGUSTA, Georgia, July 22, 2010 ( - Attorneys with the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) filed suit against Augusta State University Wednesday on behalf of a counseling student who was allegedly told that her Christian beliefs are unethical and incompatible with the prevailing views of the counseling profession. The student, Jennifer Keeton, says she has been told to stop communicating her beliefs and that she must undergo "training" to accept homosexuality in order to graduate from the counseling program.
Augusta State ordered Keeton to undergo a re-education plan, in which she must attend “diversity sensitivity training,” complete additional remedial reading, and write papers to describe their impact on her beliefs. If she does not change her beliefs or agree to the plan, the university says it will expel her from the Counselor Education Program.
“A public university student shouldn’t be threatened with expulsion for being a Christian and refusing to publicly renounce her faith, but that’s exactly what’s happening here. Simply put, the university is imposing thought reform,” said ADF Senior Counsel David French.
“Abandoning one’s own religious beliefs should not be a precondition at a public university for obtaining a degree. This type of leftist zero-tolerance policy is in place at far too many universities, and it must stop."
Keeton, 24, is pursuing her master’s degree in counseling at Augusta State. Lawyers say that after her professors learned of her biblical beliefs, specifically her views on homosexual conduct, the school imposed the re-education plan. Keeton says she never denigrated anyone in communicating her beliefs but merely stated factually what they were in appropriate contexts.
The plan, according to ADF lawyers, assails Keeton’s beliefs as inconsistent with the counseling profession and expresses suspicion over “Jen’s ability to be a multiculturally competent counselor, particularly with regard to working with gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, and queer/questioning (GLBTQ) populations.” They say the plan requires her to take steps to change her beliefs through additional assignments and additional “diversity sensitivity training" and to “work to increase exposure and interactions with gay populations. One such activity could be attending the Gay Pride Parade in Augusta.”
Each month, Keeton is allegedly required to complete a report on how the “remediation” assignments have influenced her beliefs so that faculty can “decide the appropriateness of her continuation in the counseling program.” Lawyers say the plan concludes by noting that “failure to complete all elements of the remediation plan will result in dismissal from the Counselor Education Program.”
In an ADF video, Keeton said that, “While I want to stay in the school counseling program, I know that I can't honestly complete the remediation plan knowing that I would have to alter my beliefs." "I'm not willing to, and I know I can't, change my Biblical views," she said.
ADF attorneys filed the complaint and a motion for preliminary injunction in Keeton v. Anderson-Wiley with the U.S. District Court for the District of Georgia.
ADF is currently litigating a similar case involving a counseling student at Eastern Michigan University and successfully resolved a case at Missouri State University. Also in litigation is a case involving a Georgia counselor fired by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention because she would not agree to affirm homosexual behavior as morally acceptable.

Getting the 1984 vibe yet?

Here we witness the end result of the untreated cancer of political correctness and multiculturalism.  This school is basically giving this poor girl an ultimatum; change your beliefs to fit ours and give up your freedom of thought or be punished.  The only difference between them and O'Brien from Orwell's classic is that they're not torturing her.

When will we wake up and stop this madness?  This plague has been infecting our campuses for years.  Schools have gone from institutions dedicated to the free exchange of ideas to becoming little more than centers of indoctrination into left-wing politics, and student's rights are sacrificed at the altar of "diversity" to satisfy the sacred cows of multiculturalism. 

It's time to end the madness.  It's time to let our voices be heard.  Stand up for student rights.  Write to Augusta State and charitably express your outrage.

Pax Christi.

UK Group to Advertise the Impossible

From Britain's version of the NYT, The Guardian.

    London buses to carry female ordination advert during pope's visit

    Catholic group's initiative will see the slogan 'Pope Benedict Ordain Women Now' appear on 10 buses throughout September
    London bus 460
    The group has paid around £10,000 for posters to appear on 10 buses for a month from August 30
    In a move designed to coincide with the pope's visit to Britain in September, London buses are to carry posters calling for the ordination of women.
    The initiative, from the UK group Catholic Women's Ordination (CWO), will see buses carrying the slogan "Pope Benedict Ordain Women Now".
    According to the weekly Catholic magazine the Tablet, CWO has paid about £10,000 for the posters to appear on 10 buses for a month from August 30.
    The pope will be in the UK from September 16, spending two days in the capital, and the posters will appear on routes that go past Westminster Cathedral and Westminster Hall. Both venues feature on the papal itinerary.
    Last Thursday the Vatican issued sweeping changes to its laws on sexual abuse, extending the period in which charges can be filed against priests in church courts and broadening the use of fast-track procedures to defrock them. But while the document dealt mostly with paedophilia, it also stated that the "attempted ordination of a woman" to the priesthood was one of the most serious crimes in church law.
    The mention of both issues in the same breath caused anger within some groups, especially those in favour of women priests, and prompted a Vatican official to clarify its position, saying the crimes were of a different nature and gravity.
    The outcry boosted interest in the movement for female Catholic priests, with CWO receiving donations and dozens of membership inquiries.
    One member, Pat Brown, said a press conference would be held during the papal visit at which the group would make its case for ordaining women.
    "We love the church and don't want to be disruptive. We are trying to get support and would love to have five minutes with the pope. We are very concerned about what is going on in the church at the moment."
    Buses have become the preferred vehicle for believers and nonbelievers to promote their cause to the wider public. The trend started in January 2009, when a group of atheists arranged for an "upbeat and positive" message to counter slogans of hellfire and damnation from some churches.
    Organisers exceeded their modest £5,500 fundraising target, receiving more than £150,000, and their success encouraged atheist and humanist groups around the world to carry out similar campaigns.
    The advert, the idea of writer Ariane Sherine, bore the words "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life". It was one of the top 10 most complained about adverts of that year.
    A parody advert soon followed from the Christian Party, which claimed: "There definitely is a God. So join the Christian Party and enjoy your life".
    It drew 1,045 objections, making it the fourth most complained about advert since records at the Advertising Standards Authority began.

    CWO needs to reread Ordinatio Sacerdotalis and realize that women cannot, will not, and never will be ordained to the priesthood.  That's the simple reality of it.

    Tuesday, July 20, 2010

    Robert Spencer: Muslim Beheads Wife, Claims Victim Status

    Via Human Events:

    Muslim Beheads Wife, Claims Victim Status

    by Robert Spencer


    In February 2009, Aasiya Z. Hassan, a 37-year-old Muslim woman, was founded decapitated in Orchard Park, N.Y., a village near Buffalo. Her husband, Muzzammil Hassan, 44, admits that he beheaded his wife. Yet now, in a bizarre turn in the case, Muzzammil Hassan has claimed that he was the real victim in the case, driven to murder his wife after enduring years of her emotional and physical abuse.

    The case stands as a classic example of the universal tendency on the part of Islamic supemacists and jihadists to blame everyone but themselves for what they have done.

    In a larger sense, Muzzammil Hassan’s attempt to claim that he was actually the victim of the woman he beheaded is exactly like the jihadis blaming American foreign policy for the global jihad, and is related to the campaign to get the West to "stop linking Islam with terrorism."

    Islamic jihadists link Islam with terrorism with consistency and religious fervor, but if a Western non-Muslim notices this, he is "hateful," "bigoted," "Islamophobic," "ignorant of Islam," etc. Never would the Muslims who accuse non-Muslims of "hate" for "linking Islam with terrorism" ever look to themselves, see the responsibility for the link as being within the Muslim community rather than outside it, and challenge those jihadists instead.

    It is always someone else’s fault. In this case, according to the Buffalo News, “Hassan has never publicly denied killing his wife. Instead, he has suggested he will build his court defense on the grounds that as a long-abused spouse, he finally snapped and killed his wife in a desperate bid to end the psychological abuse inflicted upon him.” Hassan himself has claimed that “anytime I sought outside help, I got falsely accused of sexual misconduct or physical abuse—more than 12 police reports, each in response to my reaching out for help from counselors, my family or her family."

    Poor lamb. Clearly the only option left open to him was to behead his wife.

    It seems as if Muzzammil Hassan is an old hand at this kind of deception. He beheaded Aasiya in the offices of the Muslim cable channel, Bridges TV, which he founded. Muzzammil Hassan founded Bridges TV in 2004 to combat the negative perceptions of Muslims that he thought were dominating the mainstream media.

    According to a Reuters story at the time, none other than Aasiya “came up with the idea.” It was all about depicting Muslims as moderate and peaceful. Muzzammil explained: “Some derogatory comments were being made about Muslims that offended her. She was seven-months pregnant, and she thought she didn’t want her kids growing up in this environment.”

    Bridges TV originally declared that its intention was to “fuse American culture with the values of Islam in a healthy, family-oriented way.”

    However, there were indications at the outset that it might not have been as moderate as many assumed. Bridges TV from the beginning had ties to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case, and, which retails rabid anti-Semitic literature. In 2006 Arab News reported that Hassan was trying to raise money for the network from Saudi investors.

    Government and law enforcement officials should have recognized these warning signs and paid more heed to Aasiya Hassan’s claims of abuse. The mainstream media should not have given Muzzammil Hassan credibility as a “moderate” Muslim without looking more deeply into his connections. And on a larger scale, the claims of groups like CAIR that have so many connections to terror groups and activities should no longer be taken at face value.

    The stakes are simply too high. And the decapitated body of Aasiya Hassan will be just the beginning if these words are not needed, as they probably will not be.

    Muzzammil Hassan is not a victim. Muzzammil Hassan is a murderer. Islamic jihadists worldwide are not victims of American foreign policy, or Israel’s, or of anything else. They are murderers. If the West doesn’t regain its moral clarity about this, it will not prevail against them.

    Another shining example of the "religion of peace".

    Monday, July 19, 2010

    Belarus Pillow Fight: Threat to National Security?

    Courtesy of MSNBC comes this little tidbit.

    MINSK, Belarus — In Belarus, an authoritarian, former Soviet nation, even a pillow fight can be seen as a threat to national security.
    On Thursday, club-wielding police dispersed about 400 pillow-wielding youths who gathered in Minsk, the capital, to humorously commemorate the anniversary of the Battle of Grunwald. It stopped an invasion of German Catholic crusaders in Eastern Europe 600 years ago.
    Some 50 of the youths were detained.
    Authorities often crack down on rallies and protests in Belarus, a country regarded by many as medieval in its suppression of opposition and independent media.
    The U.S. and some European countries have dubbed Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko as "Europe's last dictator."
    Officials refused to comment on the detentions.

    Here's a hat tip:  When your leader is so despotic that he finds massive pillow fights a threat to national security, it's time for a movement to get the guy out of there.

    To the people of Belarus I say:  У надзеі на будучыню (I pray Google Translate got this one right)

    Wednesday, July 14, 2010

    Relic Stolen from Boston Cathedral

    Spokesman for the Archdiocese of Boston, Terrence Donilon, released the following statement Monday July 12:
    Relic of the True Cross Stolen from the Cathedral of the Holy Cross
    On Thursday, July 1, staff from the Cathedral of the Holy Cross learned that the relic of the true Cross was stolen from the Cathedral’s Blessed Sacrament Chapel. Boston Police were immediately notified and an investigation was begun to determine who might be responsible. That investigation continues.
    The relic of the true Cross is an important sacramental that helps Christians contemplate the crucified Savior and the great suffering he endured for the salvation of the world. The true Cross was discovered in the fourth century, and since then its particles have been diffused to the Church throughout the world. The Cathedral’s relic of the true Cross was brought from France in the Nineteenth Century and given to Bishop Cheverus, Boston’s first Bishop.
    In the Christian faith, the Cross of Christ is an expression of the triumph of Christ over the powers of darkness. Fr. Kevin O’Leary, the Rector of the Cathedral, added: “We are deeply troubled that this sacred relic was stolen, and we pray for those responsible. We ask the faithful of the Archdiocese of Boston to join the Cathedral’s parishioners in praying every day for its return.
    Is this an act of anti-Catholicism?  I can't say for certain, but I'm at a loss to come up with any other reason why someone would steal a relic from a church. 

    Please pray for the safe return of the relic to the Boston cathedral.

    Tuesday, July 13, 2010

    LifeSite: U. of IL to "Review" Firing of Catholic Prof.


    URBANA, Illinois, July 13, 2010 ( - The University of Illinois has issued an open-ended statement regarding a professor of a Catholicism course who was fired after stating that homosexual activity is contrary to the natural moral law. The university statement says only that the school preserves a "commitment to the principles of academic freedom" and that the matter is being reviewed.
    The university did not respond to's (LSN) request for comment Monday. However, in an email response posted on, University of Illinois President Michael J. Hogan stated that "academic freedom is at the core of our teaching and research missions," and that he has directed the UIUC Senate’s standing Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure to review the firing of Dr. Kenneth Howell.
    Dr. Howell had taught “Introduction to Catholicism and Modern Catholic Thought” at the university's Department of Religion since 2001, and also taught at the diocesan-run Newman center on campus. It was revealed late last week that, according to the professor, he was terminated after the Office of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered Concerns learned of his email explaining to students how homosexuality was contrary to the natural moral law.
    Howell's email stated in part: "Natural Moral Law says that Morality must be a response to REALITY. In other words, sexual acts are only appropriate for people who are complementary, not the same."
    Robert McKim, chairman of the Department of Religion, persisted in terminating Howell even after Howell offered not to address the topic of homosexuality in class. Howell is now seeking legal action with the help of Alliance Defense Fund attorneys.
    In his statement, Hogan insisted that "the University administration shares my commitment to the principles of academic freedom," but "at the same time, we do believe it’s important to fully investigate all of the details related to this situation."
    "As I’m sure you’re aware, it is sometimes the case that public reports may convey only part of the story. I think it important to reserve judgment until I have all of the facts and I hope you’ll agree," he wrote.
    Hogan said he expected the review "to be completed very soon."

    Deo gratias.  Let us pray that this travesty is corrected very soon.

    Outrageous: Dutch Church Dons Orange for World Cup "Mass"

    This Dutch Catholic church has apparently forgotten what the Mass really is, not unlike far to many churches nowadays.

    Would it help them to learn that orange is a traditional color of anti-Catholicism?  I don't know the answer to that, but I do know this; this is sacrilege, plain and simple.  There's no other way to describe it.

    We must pray and make acts of reparation for this outrage.  Please say a prayer for the pastor and his parish.

    Sunday, July 11, 2010

    Viva Espana

    NED 0-1 ESP

    Congratulations to Spain, winners of the 2010 FIFA World Cup.

    Felicidades a España, los ganadores de la Copa Mundial FIFA 2010.

    Friday, July 9, 2010

    Michelle Malkin: Whitewashing Black Racism

    From Human Events; All rights reserved to the copyright holder.

    Why haven't national media outlets reported on the vile and violent rants of the New Black Panther Party (NBPP) thugs whose 2008 voter intimidation tactics got a pass from the Obama administration? Simple: Radical black racism doesn't fit the Hope and Change narrative. There's no way to shoehorn Bush-bashing into the story. And, let's face it, exposing the inflammatory rhetoric of the left does nothing to help liberal editors and reporters fulfill their true calling -- embarrassing the right.

    This week, Justice Department whistleblower J. Christian Adams came forward with damning public testimony about how Obama officials believe "civil rights law should not be enforced in a race-neutral manner, and should never be enforced against blacks or other national minorities." In the wake of Adams' expose on how the Obama DOJ abandoned default judgments against the NBPP bullies for the sake of politically correct racial politics, a shocking video clip of one of the lead defendants in the Philadelphia voter intimidation case resurfaced on the Internet. It shows bloodthirsty King Samir Shabazz during a 2009 National Geographic documentary interview spewing:

    "You want freedom? You're gonna have to kill some crackers! You're gonna have to kill some of their babies!"

    These NBPP death threats and white-bashing diatribes are nothing new to those who have tracked the black supremacy movement. In August 2009, nearly a year ago, I reported on a sign on display outside NBPP defendant (and elected member of Philadelphia's 14th Ward Democratic Committee) Jerry Jackson's home. It reads: "COLORED ONLY: No Whites Allowed." In July 2009, I interviewed poll watcher/witness Christopher Hill, whom Shabazz and Jackson called "cracker" several times while Shabazz brandished his baton.

    "They physically attempted to block me," Hill recounted. He also saw a group of elderly ladies walk away from the polling site without voting while the duo preened in front of the entrance. "If you're a poll watcher, you shouldn't be dressed in paramilitary garb," Hill said, as he wondered aloud at what would have happened if he had showed up in the same sort of costume.

    In May 2009, I reported on the affidavit of civil rights attorney and poll watcher Bartle Bull, who witnessed the NBPP thuggery in Philadelphia and reported on billy club-wielding Shabazz's election day boast: "You're about to be ruled by the black man, cracker."

    In the fall of 2008, just days before he showed up to hector white poll workers, Shabazz told the Philadelphia Inquirer:

    "I'm about the total destruction of white people. I'm about the total liberation of black people. I hate white people. I hate my enemy... The only thing the cracker understands is violence... The only thing the cracker understands is gunpowder. You got to take violence to violence."

    The desire to kill, subordinate and demonize white people is a staple of NBPP propaganda. An NBPP Trenton, N.J., chapter "block party" music video posted on YouTube calls on black followers to "bang for freedom," "put the bang right into a cracker's face," and "if you're going to bang, bang for black power ...  hang a cracker ... if you're going to bang, bang on the white devil ... burying him near the river bank with the right shovel ... community revolution in progress ... banging for crackers to go to hell, we don't need em."

    Chanting "Black Power," Minister Najee Muhammad, national field marshal for the New Black Panther Party, and Uhuru Shakur, local chairman of the Atlanta NBPP chapter, issued a pre-Election Day 2008 threat to "racists and other angry whites who are upset over an impending Barack Obama presidential victory." Said Muhammad: "Most certainly, we cannot allow these racist forces to slaughter our babies or commit other acts of violence against the black population, nor our black president."

    That's rich, given that the only racists talking about slaughtering babies are the ones with New Black Panther Party patches on their puffed chests.

    If a Tea Party activist threatened to kill the babies of his political opponents, it wouldn't just be front-page news. It would be the subject of Democrat-led congressional investigations, a series of terrified New York Times columns about the perilous "climate of hate," a Justice Department probe by Attorney General Eric Holder, a domestic terror alert from Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, and another Important Teachable Moment Speech/Summit from Healer-in-Chief Barack Obama.

    But with the racism shoe on the other foot, Team Obama and its media water-carriers are exhibiting the very racial cowardice Holder once purported to condemn. Thanks to Obama's feckless Department of Injustice, these black supremacist brutes are free to show up on the next national Election Day at polling places in full paramilitary regalia with nightsticks, hurling racist, anti-American epithets at those exercising their right to vote and at those protecting the integrity of the electoral process.

    The reaction of our national media watchdogs: Shhhhhhhh.

    Ms. Malkin raises an excellent point here.  What have in the case with the Black Panthers is clear voter intimidation, which is a crime.  And yet they were prosecuted and the case mysteriously dropped.

    Now we learn that these same men have been spouting mountains of horrible racist language against their "enemies", and yet we see almost no condemnations in the media or from the Obama administration.  We haven't seen any words of condemnation from any of the "civil rights" leaders; the NAACP, Jesse Jackson, etc.  Why the silence on this issue?

    What we're witnessing is a crime even greater than the voter intimidation; a failure to recognize and condemn evil.

    More Judicial Activism: Judge Rules DOMA "Unconstitutional"

    From LSN:

    BOSTON, MA, July 9, 2010 ( - A federal judge in Boston has ruled that the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which enshrines into law the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman, is unconstitutional.
    Judge Joseph Tauro claimed in a ruling Thursday that DOMA violates the right of homosexual couples to equal protection under the U.S. Constitution.
    "This court has determined that it is clearly within the authority of the Commonwealth to recognize same-sex marriages among its residents, and to afford those individuals in same-sex marriages any benefits, rights, and privileges to which they are entitled by virtue of their marital status," wrote the judge.
    "The federal government, by enacting and enforcing DOMA, plainly encroaches upon the firmly entrenched province of the state."
    The ruling, although not entirely without precedent, marks the first time a federal judge has attacked the law in a ruling that holds significant legal weight. In February 2009, Judge Stephen Reinhardt of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals also declared DOMA unconstitutional, but did so in a ruling regarding an internal judiciary dispute. Such a ruling does not carry the weight of precedent, as would a decision on a lawsuit.
    Two suits had been placed before the court challenging DOMA, one brought by Boston's Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, the second by Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley.
    In the ruling pertaining to both suits, Justice Tauro wrote that “the government's argument assumes that Congress has some interest in a uniform definition of marriage for purposes of determining federal rights, benefits, and privileges. There is no such interest."
    The U.S. Justice Department has so far declined to comment on the ruling, saying that the decision is being reviewed.
    Lisa Barstow, a spokeswoman for the Massachusetts Family Institute, said that while her organization was "really distressed" over the decision, the future of DOMA would rely heavily on how Obama's Justice Department (DOJ) chooses to respond.
    "We expect that [the DOJ] will appeal; whether they will appeal with gusto is what we are looking at next," Barstow told Barstow said that there "are a number of holes" in the judge's decision that could easily be overturned if the DOJ chooses "to appeal this in a meaningful way."
    Attorney General Coakley, who made headlines earlier this year as the U.S. Senate candidate unexpectedly edged out by Republican Scott Brown, applauded the ruling Thursday. She called the decision "an important step toward achieving equality for all married couples in Massachusetts." Massachusetts was the first U.S. state to legalize same-sex "marriage."
    The attorney general's suit had attacked DOMA by claiming it violated the Constitution by interfering with state authority, in addition to violating the equal-protection clause.
    “Today’s landmark decision is an important step toward achieving equality for all married couples in Massachusetts and assuring that all of our citizens enjoy the same rights and protections under our Constitution,” Coakley said in a statement. “It is unconstitutional for the federal government to discriminate, as it does because of DOMA’s restrictive definition of marriage. It is also unconstitutional for the federal government to decide who is married and to create a system of first- and second-class marriages.”
    Posting on Twitter, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the ruling "great news!"
    The ruling, if upheld by an appeals court, has the potential for a wide-reaching impact on other present and future same-sex "marriage" cases across the country, including the ongoing case against California's Proposition 8. If upheld by the Supreme Court, the case could become the "Roe v. Wade" of the marriage battle by creating a "right" to same-sex "marriage," nullifying the will of dozens of states that had approved amendments and laws protecting marriage.
    Massachusetts Family Institute president Kris Mineau called the decision “another blatant example of a judge playing legislator."
    The question of same-sex "marriage,” when put to citizens, has failed every single time. “This is why their strategy is to force same-sex ‘marriage’ through judicial fiat, as they did here in Massachusetts and other states," said Mineau in a statement, adding that he was "confident" the Supreme Court would uphold the law.
    However, DOMA is likely to face a tough battle in the Supreme Court, especially in light of the nomination of Elena Kagan to the court. Should Kagan be confirmed to the highest court of the land, she would bring another certain vote in favor of striking down the law, as she has already come out strongly in favor of the homosexualist agenda.
    In addition, pro-family leaders have pointed to a controversial brief authored under Kagan as U.S. Secretary General, in which the legal defense for the law was gutted by rejecting the ideological basis for maintaining marriage as between a man and a woman. Instead, the brief acknowledged that the Obama administration considers DOMA "discriminatory, and supports its repeal," before arguing that the plaintiff in the case lacked standing.
    Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage noted in May that the brief "explicitly and gratuitously rejected the key legal defense" for DOMA: "that such unions uniquely protect children by encouraging responsible procreation." Following Thursday's ruling, Brown lamented that, thanks to Kagan's brief, Obama's justice department has already "deliberately sabotaged this case."
    "With only Obama to defend DOMA, this federal judge has taken the extraordinary step of overturning a law passed by huge bipartisan majorities and signed into law by Pres. Clinton in 1996.  A single federal judge in Boston has no moral right to decide the definition of marriage for the people of the United States," said Brown.
    Maggie Gallagher, Chairman of NOM, was more optimistic, in light of the judge's argument: she noted that "the right of the federal government to define marriage for the purposes of its federal law and federal territories has been clear since the late 19th century, when Congress banned polygamy." "Only an incompetent defense could have lost this case. We expect to win in a higher court," she said.
    Mathew Staver of Liberty Council also said that he was "confident" the ruling would be reversed on appeal.

    Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for our nation and our judges.

    This ruling highlights all more clearly the need for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman, as God ordained it and as it always has been!  I ask everyone reading this to contact their representatives and senators and say that you want a amendment to the Constitution to protect marriage. 

    We can't let liberal activists and judges turn marriage on its head.  We must act now.

    Sunday, July 4, 2010

    WT: Media blackout for Black Panthers

    From the Washington Times

    Where is the New York Times? Where is The Washington Post? Where are CBS and NBC? A whistleblower makes explosive allegations about the Department of Justice; his story is backed by at least two other witnesses; and the allegations involve the two hot-button issues of race and of blatant politicization of the justice system. A potential constitutional confrontation stemming from the scandal brews between the Justice Department and the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. A congressman highly respected for thoughtfulness and bipartisanship has all but accused the department of serious impropriety. By every standard of objective journalism, this adds up to real news.
    Or it would be real news if a Republican Justice Department stood accused. It would be real news if the liberal media weren't mostly in the tank for our celebrated but failing first black president.
    Tomorrow, the Civil Rights Commission will hear long-awaited testimony from J. Christian Adams, who resigned from the Voting Section of the Justice Department after the departmentcommission's lawful subpoena. Mr. Adams first told his story in public in these pages on June 28 and later did two major interviews with Fox News' Megyn Kelly. In those appearances, he flatly accused the Obama Justice Department of adopting an unlawful, immoral policy identified in previous Washington Times improperly ordered him to refuse compliance with the editorials - namely, enforcing civil rights laws against white perpetrators who victimized minorities but never against black perpetrators who victimize whites or Asians. If this is indeed the policy, it makes a scandalous mockery of the cherished American principle of "equal justice under the law."
    All these allegations stem from what should have been a slam-dunk voter-intimidation case against members of the New Black Panther Party videotaped in menacing behavior outside a Philadelphia polling place in 2008. The Obama Justice Department dropped or seriously reduced all the charges or penalties in the case after it already effectively had been won. Mr. Adams' former colleague, longtime award-winning civil rights lawyer Christopher Coates, has been reported on multiple occasions to have backed Mr. Adams' version of events and of the Obama team's openly discriminatory policy.
    If the department's motives are not racial or racist, Justice officials surely appear political. One of the Black Panthers against whom the department declined to press charges was an official poll watcher for the Democratic Party and an elected local party official. The department dropped charges just four days before another election, allowing him again to serve as a poll watcher.
    Mr. Adams says the official most directly involved in dropping the case, Steven H. Rosenbaum - whose ethics have been subject to judicial sanction - refused to read his own team's legal briefs before deciding to dismiss the case. Mr. Adams accuses Thomas E. Perez, head of the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division, of providing false answers in testimony to the Civil Rights Commission.
    On a parallel track, The Washington Times has reported strong circumstantial evidence suggesting that department officials may have consulted the White House before dismissing the case. That possibility, too, cries out for investigation.
    These broad policy questions and suggestions of political chicanery are important. Do we have a nation of laws equally applied to all, or is justice being reduced to raw politics? Investigating such questions is the essence of the news business. Failure to look into such a scandal is evidence of the institutional corruption of the much-ballyhooed "fourth branch of government," a supposedly independent media.

    I can't really say I'm surprised at this.  For the longest time, the mainstream media has been interested only, seemingly, in news stories that advance the fantasy that America is still a bastion of racist hate, i.e. stories about criminal white supremacists, or whatever passes for them.

    Now, we have a clear case of the New Black Panthers, a group that many consider to be the black version of the Ku Klux Klan, engaging in blatant voter intimidation, and the Justice Department refuses to do anything, and the media is silent?  Where are the articles and news features calling for an investigation and prosecution of those responsible?

    I don't think that's an unreasonable question to ask.

    Article copyrighted to The Washington Times.

    Thursday, July 1, 2010

    MSNBC: Giant whale-eating whale discovered

    by Larry O'Hanlon

    The massive skull and jaw of a 13-million-year-old sperm whale has been discovered eroding from the windblown sands of a coastal desert of Peru.
    The extinct cousin of the modern sperm whale is the first fossil to rival modern sperm whales in size — although this is a very different beast, say whale evolution experts.
    "We could see it from very far," said paleontologist Olivier Lambert of the Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle in Paris, France, who led the team which found the fossil.
    The giant 3-meter (10-foot) skull of what's been dubbed Leviathan melvillei (in honor of the author of "Moby Dick") was found with teeth in its top and bottom jaws up to 36 centimeters (14 inches) long. The discovery is reported in the July 1 issue of the journal Nature.
    Living sperm whales have teeth only in their lower jaws and are specialized to feed on giant squid, Lambert explained. They suck down squid like large spaghetti noodles rather than catch the prey with their teeth. The much toothier fossil sperm whales, however, may have eaten more like a outsized-orca, or killer whale: chomping great big bites out of its prey.
    "These are very unusual attributes," said cetacea evolution expert Ewan Fordyce of the University of Otago in New Zealand. "It's remarkably big. That is unexpected."
    Another sign that this ancient whale had a killer bite is the large hole in the skull to accommodate a large jaw muscle.

    And here's the beast they think it was.

     Herman Melville, eat your heart out.