The History of Amnesty

Immigration Protest, San Francisco, 2006, by chicoer2001

In a letter to a US newspaper, The Saint Louis Post-Dispatch, the writer, Steve Reiss, points to a disturbing fact: If the current immigration bill being debated by congress passes, it will be the EIGHTH amnesty for illegal immigrants in the past 21 years.

To quote the letter:

1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA) Amnesty, 1986: A blanket amnesty for 2.7 million illegal aliens

2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens

3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994

4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for nearly one million illegal aliens from Central America

5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti

6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens

7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens

Notice that other than the 1986 Reagan amnesty, all of the above were done in the 1990-2000, under the Clinton administration.

That's significant because, coincidentally, immigration during the period 1990-2000 was the greatest surge in US history (over 32 million), in fact its about twice that of the immigration wave at the turn of the century (16 million). For an eye-opening graph on this subject, go here.

We don't need to do another experiment. We have the history to prove it. All amnesties do is encourage further illegal immigration. Spain also found this out a little too late, granting an amnesty in 2005 and then having to appeal to the EU for help dealing with the swarm of boat people afterwards, many of them losing their lives at sea.

In the US, its normally across the desert, and plenty of people lose their lives there too. As I said earlier, this could still work though, if border enforcement is increased to the point of real effectiveness. But why take that chance when a better solution is available here?

Click here to continue reading...

The Silent Crime, Part II

Knoxville, TN

In an earlier post, I wrote about the blackout by major media outlets over the Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom rape/murders. Apparently, some of the initial information put out on the case was incorrect:

1) Channon Christian was killed within one day, not held for four days (She was raped and tortured for several hours after Newsom was killed however).

2) The bodies were not mutilated as originally described (although they were still beaten, torn, and burned)

3) Channon's body was not dismembered and placed in five separate trash bags; instead her dead body was wrapped in five trash bags.

While these facts are important, I don't think they mitigate the crime very much. Besides, the trial is just starting and unfortunately I would not be surprised if there are a few more horrifying revelations along the way. Still, I want to keep this story as currently accurate as possible.

The story has generated a couple of backlashes, and even backlashes to those backlashes. One, from people who believe this is a hate crime, and can't understand Police Chief Sterling Owen saying:

"We have no evidence to support the notion that this was a race-based crime. We see this as a cold-blooded murder."

But that's just the point. Every cold-blooded murder IS a hate crime. What else would it be, a love crime? This helps illustrate the absolute absurdity and uselessness of hate crime laws. The defendants are already facing penalties of life in prison or the death penalty. What more can you do by charging them with a hate crime? Penalty wise, why do we care if they did this crime out of hatred or just for fun? I think most of the people who are insisting this is a hate crime, are not so much driven by anger against hate crimes, but by simple unfairness in the media and the justice system, which pretty much automatically assumes any crime committed by a white on any minority is a hate crime.

Also, family of the victims and government officials are speaking about their distaste that white supremacist groups are taking up this crime as a rallying cause. This is unfortunate, but the media has some culpability here as well. By hyping up the bogus Duke Rape case to absurd levels, some people feel like they deserve payback. John Gill, special counsel with the DA said:

"The DA's office is outraged they have tried to abuse the victims by using the death of loved ones for racist purposes"

Fair enough. But once again, where were any of these cries of outrage when special interests groups hyped up the racist aspects of the Duke Case, the James Byrd murder, the Amadou Diallo shooting, the Don Imus controversy, etc? Besides, other than a few die-hard white separatists, most of the critics are asking for the media to be more race-neutral, not racist, and pointing to this as an example of the media's hypocrisy in the matter.

Speaking of bias, that is the next problem. The media is not so happy about all the criticism directed their way:

On the Internet, they are a Wikipedia entry. Among white separatists, they are a tool. Within a racially divided America, they are a cause.
That they are murder victims in a horrific Knoxville crime has gotten lost in all that noise.

No, the problem is that it is the media that has forgotten this young couple, and the blogosphere that is not letting them forget it. The media's attention deficit disorder is what started the blog frenzy, and now both FOX and CNN have been forced to mention the story due to this (although they have both reported on the media bias aspects, not really on the story itself).

In the end, you have a group of criminals who are devoid of any amount of decency or respect for life whatsoever. They took this young couple, used them up, and discarded them as if they were nothing.



Like what you see? Click on any of the labels below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my feed

Click here to continue reading...

Columnist Andrew Sullivan is at it Again [Updated]

I guess the release of the Al-Quaeda torture manual has him scrambling again to divert the debate away from real torture and back to his primary focus, attacking the United States. But since he has no new material here (he's been blogging for years on the subject, and there wasn't much material to start with; US approved torture has been alleged in very few cases, and never proven) he has to make up some evidence. His new tactic is a frequent standby of those with very weak arguments: guilt by association.

Apparently, since the Nazis used the phrase "Verschärfte Vernehmung", which one can translate as "enhanced interrogation techniques" (although literally "sharpened interrogations"), and Bush also used the term "enhanced interrogation techniques", we are doing the same thing the Nazis did, therefore, we are bad like the Nazis.

I'm not joking. Read his post yourself. This logic is so wretchedly inane, so incredibly empty, that it's only purpose is as a desperate smokescreen, lest people start forgetting about US abuses and actually notice the real tortures going on in the rest of the world.

Just so there's no mistaking here: I am against any kind of torture in all circumstances. The few cases where it might be the only route to save lives (like certain scenes from the TV series "24") I would consider at the time only if/when I saw a situation like that actually occur. But to my knowledge, that has never actually occured in the history of the US.

And unlike Mr. Sullivan, I actually have some experience in this matter. I am a trained interrogator (it was a previous military specialty of mine). I have personally interrogated hundreds of Iraqis, both willing and unwilling to talk (most willing). I have never once used or seen anything resembling torture in any way. On one occasion, an interpreter who was working with another interrogator, hit a prisoner one time (and not very hard). He was fired immediately.

Now, it's true that some abuses have occured under US leadership. Most people (including Mr. Sullivan) like to point to Abu Gharayb. But Abu Gharayb had nothing to do with interrogations! The abusers, who were prosecuted for it, were not CIA or military intelligence, but a bunch of low-ranking national guard soldiers acting like idiots. Things like waterboarding, sleep deprivation, and stress positions have also been alleged to be used by the CIA, but never proven. But even if true, if we are going to have a productive debate on the subject, we have to maintain some level of porportionality. Comparing those alleged CIA techniques to insurgent tortures such as eye gouging, or drilling holes in the body is like comparing shoplifting to serial murder. Personally, I would like to prosecute both offenses when they occur. But where I put the majority of my attention shows where my priorities lie. I guess my priorities are very different from Mr. Sullivan's, and the owners of the main stream media at large, judging by how much they obsessed over Abu Gharayb back in 2004.

Incredibly, at the very end of the long post where continually compares the US to the Nazis, he then dishonestly tries to deny what we were just reading. In a "CYA" attempt to deflect potential objections:

Critics will no doubt say I am accusing the Bush administration of being Hitler. I'm not. There is no comparison between the political system in Germany in 1937 and the U.S. in 2007. What I am reporting is a simple empirical fact: the interrogation methods approved and defended by this president are not new. Many have been used in the past. The very phrase used by the president to describe torture-that-isn't-somehow-torture - "enhanced interrogation techniques" - is a term originally coined by the Nazis.

The problem is none of those empirical facts, as you carefully state them here, is any kind of war crime in and of itself. You still have to prove something beyond guilt by association, which you failed to do. The only thing you succeeded in is, once again, smearing the United States Government and feeding your enormous ego.

Update at 6/1/2007 11:35:00 AM:
Dave Price at "Dean's World" says the same thing I do, although much more effectively:

the invocation of an emotional trigger like Nazism is clearly intended to convey something sinister like “BUSH=HITLER” without actually being so gauche as to say it out loud, because without that stigma of association the post really says nothing at all, as one quickly realizes with a little reflection.

Click here to continue reading...

One Illegal Immigrant Killed, Another Crippled in Immigration Sweep

Railroad line crossing the US-Mexican border. Photo by marcokalmann on Flickr.

While trying to elude immigration authorities, one man jumps from a moving train and loses his head (literally) while another falls on the tracks and loses his leg. Another tragic story in America? No, this was in Mexico at the hands of Mexican agents! The hypocrisy here is unbelievable.

Most Americans know that plenty of Mexicans enter the US illegally every year, many with full support from the Mexican government. What many don't know, is that Mexico vigorously patrols its own southern border to catch illegal aliens entering from Central or South America.

Some might think that they are doing the US a favor, since most of those migrants are certainly headed north for the United States. But this isn't out of any altruism on their part; Mexico seems to feel that that particular cash-cow to the North is for themselves only. They don't want even cheaper labor from the South filling up all those jobs, thereby cutting down the remittances sent back to Mexico. And they don't like foreigners hanging around using their services either. You see, unlike the US, Mexico does not allow illegal aliens to use their public school system. So while I understand their true motives, it stinks of the worst kind of hypocrisy, after claiming to be so concerned about the human rights of migrants, free trade agreements, and building more bridges across the Americas.

After all, this is the same nation that has been pushing hard for an amnesty for illegal immigrants in the US. They also said they wish to:

promote a humane treatment of all immigrants, regardless of their nationality or migratory status,

This is also the same nation that opposes the border fence plan. Former Mexican President Vicente Fox called it "shameful" and compared it to the Berlin Wall. At a meeting of the Organization of American States in 2006, Mexico lobbied 28 countries total to sign a statement blasting the fence that expressed in part:

deep concern regarding the decision adopted by the United States of America to build and extend a wall on its border with Mexico, considering it to be a unilateral measure that goes against the spirit of understanding

Finally, a Mexican congressional panel once called the US border policy

"racist, xenophobic, and profoundly violative of human rights."

So I wonder what words they would use to describe it when Mexican police were chasing the 133 migrants off the train and then deporting the ones they caught?

Don't get me wrong; Mexico has every right to set their own conditions for entry into their country. And while the death is tragic, these were adults knowing full well the risks they were taking. People who hop on trains to sneak into a country and then jump off them to avoid being caught, have to live with the consequences of their own actions. What is ludicrous is for Mexico to do the very thing they heavily criticize the United States for.

For another blatant example of Mexican hypocrisy, you might want to read this piece. After announcing publicly that "the doors of the Mexican embassy in Cuba are open to all the citizens of Cuba, just as México herself is", 130 Cubans did just that, entered the Mexican embassy hoping to claim asylum, but were rejected by Mexico, and the next day handed over to the Cuban police. I guarantee you the aftermath was not pleasant for them.

The irony would almost be funny if it weren't actual human lives being ruined in the process.

Click here to continue reading...

Flattery

I found a great new blog today, called "Trying to Grok", which called my statement on War and Peace "just genius". It's written by the wife of a US military service member.

The full statement, and the meaning behind the name of this blog, is of course here. A little while ago I greatly revised it since it originally appeared on this weblog, in order to clarify the language.

Click here to continue reading...

Luxembourg American Military Cemetery

Probably the best photo I've ever seen of the memorial. By Micah JD on Flickr.

Today is the US holiday Memorial Day, a day when we honor our fallen veterans in all our nation's wars. I thought this is a good time to point out a very special US military cemetery located in the nation of Luxembourg that most Americans don't even know exists (In fact, most Americans probably haven't even heard of Luxembourg). The Luxembourg American Cemetery and Memorial, located in the Hamm quarter, is home to over 5,000 fallen US veterans of WWII.

Keep in mind that there are many thousands of US service members buried overseas, a tribute to the sacrifices America has made for the rest of the world.

Some of these men are very well known.

And some not so well known. But they are all treated with exactly the same amount of dignity.

Tombstone Photos by ClassicSoul85 on Flickr.

Click here to continue reading...

Wiping Out Israel or its Government?

Iranian Newspaper, April 2006. The Headline says: "Iran Among 8 Nuclear Powers". Note the picture of President Admedinijad surrounded by Doves, to try to give it a peaceful implication. Original Photo (modified by me) from DD/MM/YYYY on Flickr.

There's an overly long article running right now on Digg which is so preposterous that I ignored it when I first read it a couple of weeks ago. I figured reasonable people would see what a non-story it is. But apparently I was wrong. As of right now, it has 1344 diggs (and probably many more by the time you read this) which shows that there are at least 1344 people who lack some common sense.

The article claims that Iranian President Ahmedinijad did not say in his infamous speech on Oct 26, 2005: "Israel must be wiped off the map". No, instead, the much more accurate translation is "this regime occupying Jerusalem must vanish from the page of time" Wow. Doesn't that sound so much better?

To Iran's apologists, anyway, that does sound so much better, with the key word being "regime". You see, since Bush and Blair called for regime changes in Iraq and Afghanistan, (so the logic goes) then obviously Iran can say the same thing about Israel. The apologists are essentially grasping at every straw they can to portray Admedinijad's speech in the most innocent light possible, just as they have been doing for Iran's nuclear ambitions.

First of all, Bush and Blair's statements are unrelated to Iran and Israel, but in any case they were calling for regime changes toward democracy. Since Israel is already a democracy (even giving full rights to its Arab citizens), the only way you are going to wipe out the regime IS by wiping out its citizens.

Second, you have to look at the context of the statement and the speaker himself. At the time of his speech, he was standing in front of a backdrop with the words "A World Without Zionism" prominently displayed in Farsi and English, and during the speech several times he referred to the "Zionist regime" in Israel. Shortly after this speech, he headlined a Jerusalem Day ceremony in Oct 2005 (an annual rally to show Iran's support for Palestine), where there were tens of thousands of participants:

Shouting "Death to Israel, death to the Zionists", the protesters dragged Israeli flags along the ground and then set them on fire.
Many carried posters and placards sporting the slogan "Israel should be wiped off the map".
Joining the protest, Mr Ahmadinejad said: "My words were the Iranian nation's words."

Or, if you don't believe the media, you can watch video of him whipping up a rally crying "Death to Israel" here at a rally in January this year, captured by Memri TV on YouTube. And these aren't exactly aberrations. "Death to Israel, Death to America" have become routine slogans in Iran everywhere from political rallies to grade school assemblies. And there are also of course other signs that give us clues to Iran's intentions toward Israel, like my previous post here.

Third, the article is not exactly news. It actually was released back in January, and was generally ignored for many of the reasons above. But now Anti-War.com decided to rally a group of their supporters and put this on the front page of Digg. By the way, Anti-War.com does not really live up to its namesake. Far from protesting all war, it has focused over 90% of its energies to simply discrediting the United States, and to a lesser degree Israel, on a wide range of issues (with all the wars going on in the world, you might think they would branch out a bit). In any case, don't just take my word for it, go to their front page and take a look for yourself.

Finally, bear in mind, even the Digg article admits that "wiped of the map" was not an invention of the West, but it was put out by Iranian news outlets and then spread by the wire services. Westerners usually assume that Iranians know their own language better than others do. Maybe it is time to scrutinize the official Iranian media a bit more, and stop taking everything they feed us for at face value.

Click here to continue reading...

If the Police/Military Just Disappeared, What then?

Protest against police brutality, Montreal, March 15, 2005. Photo by -Antoine- at Flickr.

"Baron Bodissey" at Gates of Vienna wrote something yesterday that captures the spirit of this weblog perfectly. After pointing out that the same people who routinely deride and protest against the police wouldn't hesitate to call them in a minute when their own lives are in danger, he writes:

Bob Dylan famously sang, "How many times will the cannonballs fly before they are forever banned?"

The unspoken assumption behind this plea for universal non-violence is that the state or the "international community" possesses some kind of power to enforce such a ban. And if someone -- some group, country, or international gang of thugs -- refuses to observe such a ban, then what?

Why, then we pick up the phone and call the pigs.

Oh, wait a minute -- we've "banned" the pigs.

So what do we do now?

The answer, my friend, is blowing in the wind.

That kind of wishful thinking would be like saying: "Since doctors are always hanging around sick people, let's get rid of the doctors. Then the sick people will disappear too." What so many people fail to realize, is that its not the "cannonballs" that are the problem. Deep down, nearly everybody knows this; in fact even the most die-hard peace extremist realizes that we would be in real trouble without them.

The problem is that the worst sort of people in the world tend to arm themselves quite a bit. While there is much to admire in true pacifism, you have to decide how much you are willing to give up for it. There is a difference between making this decision for yourself as opposed to making it for the community. The Amish, for example, are able to live in their pacifistic culture only because there are others outside their community willing to take up defense on their behalf. This irony was very apparent in Oct 2006, when Charles Roberts entered an Amish schoolhouse and shot several children. The community was forced to rely on armed law enforcement officers from the outside in order to regain control of the situation and rescue the remaining hostages.

Click here to continue reading...

Forgiveness

The Ceran Family Before the Crash

Murray, Utah December 24, 2006. The Ceran family had just about the most tragic Christmas you could possibly imagine. An illegal alien drunk driver, Carlos Prieto, ran a red light and crashed his pickup into the Ceran's car, killing the mother Cheryl, 15 year old son Ian, and 7 year old daughter Julia. The father, Gary Ceran, 12 year old son Caleb, and 18 year old daughter Clarissa, were injured but survived.

Just for the senseless loss of life this story would be noteworthy enough. But the incredible thing is, at Prieto's sentencing hearing, Gary Ceran said he forgave the driver and plead for the judge to show leniency. In fact, he claimed he forgave him very quickly after the accident.

The judge sentenced Prieto to 10 years.

Deputy District Attorney Langdon Fisher said he couldn't recall ever arguing for a harsher sentence than the one sought by a victim. The prosecutor wanted three consecutive sentences of five years in prison.

Certainly no one would blame Gary Ceran if he still harbored anger about such an outrageous incident; I know my own forgiveness would not have been so quickly coming. Forgiveness is not just a luxury, it is in fact a charge that Christ gave to all of us. But 99% of the things people do to us are relatively easy to forgive; losing three family members is another order of magnitude altogether. Mr. Ceran obviously has a very rare strength of character.

At the court hearing Thursday, he said he's been called naive by people who have vilified Prieto for being in the country illegally and driving while drunk.

"I and my children, who have been most injured by his actions both physically and emotionally, harbor no such feelings," Ceran said.

That's certainly his right. Few people have suffered this kind of tragedy (additionally, the Cerans also lost three children in the past due to illnesses), and no one else can speak to their pain or how they should feel about it.

I would like to give him one piece of advice though: prison is not about revenge (or at least its not supposed to be). I'm not certain what sentence Mr. Ceran would think is just, but even if you completely forgave Prieto, that doesn't mean he should get a short sentence. It would be irresponsible to allow Prieto the opportunity to get behind the wheel again for a very long time, and completely unjust to another family if he killed someone again. Even if he was deported immediately, he could drive drunk again in his native country.

There's one more aspect of this case that is not getting much attention. The man kills three people and the MOST he can possibly get is 15 years? What is wrong with this picture? Additionally, I think most Americans do not have full confidence that he would even be deported after serving his sentence. He certainly wasn't before the tragedy.

Click here to continue reading...

Toby Keith Today

Toby Keith playing in hanger 1034

Toby Keith is in Germany right now, and today I went to see him play at the Wiesbaden Army Airfield. I would have liked to get a better picture, but didn't have my good camera with me at the time.

He does USO tours constantly, both stateside, overseas, and in Iraq, and doesn't charge a dime for them. What a great American, and a wonderful human being.

If you're not an American, then chances are you are asking "Who is Toby Keith?" Toby is probably the biggest country singer in the USA. Some cultural knowledge never hurts. Go to his web site, or Wiki page, and start reading.

Click here to continue reading...

Torture Manual Found in Iraq [Updated]

Sep 26, 2006 - Two hostages released in a mosque raid by Iraqi National Police. Note the hostage, (with face partially blacked out), has a trickle of blood down his head from a beating he received at the hands of insurgents. He was later treated by one of our medics. The very next day, one of the police was killed by a sniper, likely in retaliation for this raid

US forces in Anbar province uncovered a Sunni torture house, and freed 17 prisoners, including a 13 year old boy who had been beaten and tortured with electrocution. A torture manual was also found, pictures and video here (images are disturbing).

When searching for more information on this report, I did a Yahoo! search on "torture manual found in iraq", I came up with over 525,000 hits. Incredibly, over 90% of these links were to web sites listing the abuses of prisoners at Abu Gharayb or criticising alleged CIA torture techniques. Very little of it had to do with insurgent torture, or by anyone else other than the United States.

From CNN:

[This manual] shows how to use drills to torture people, sever hands, drag people behind vehicles, use a blowtorch or clothes iron on skin, remove eyes and electrocute people, among other tactics

The manual is made up of very graphic illustrations of men under torture. No Arabic writing; presumably it was meant for distribution to people who may not speak Arabic or are illiterate (as about 59% of Iraqis cannot read). I have a question: Where in Guantanamo Bay, the CIA "Secret Prisons" or in Abu Gharayb, did the US ever sever hands, drag people behind vehicles, use a blowtorch or clothes iron on skin, remove eyes or and electrocute people?

From an earlier account of insurgent torture:

[On the former prisoner there were] deep pocks, apparently from electric shock burns, were gouged in his skin. The shocks, he said, felt "like my soul is being ripped out of my body." But when he would start to scream, and his body would pull up from the shock, they would begin to beat him, he said.

There is a giant, quantum leap between using dogs to threaten prisoners or waterboarding them (which hasn't even been proven) to severing limbs or gouging out their eyes. I am not excusing any crimes done to prisoners at the hands of US forces, but the fact that so much attention was made to abuses done by a handful of idiot soldiers at Abu Gharayb, while the real torture going on in Iraq gets so scant attention, proves beyond a doubt how far this issue has been politicized.

You might think that columnist Andrew Sullivan, who has made torture a signature issue for him, might have something to say on this. Don't hold your breath. Only US initiated torture is of any concern to him.

I also can't help wondering about the mindset of the person who made these illustrations. Certainly he knew what they were for, and he likely had participated in tortures himself. Does he believe that this kind of torture, particularly of fellow Muslims, is acceptable in Islam?

Update 05/28/2007 18:48: Andrew Sullivan has finally been shamed into mentioned the torture manual, albeit rather reluctantly:

I see I'm getting razzed a little for not linking to the Pentagon's strange and sudden decision to release graphic drawings of al Qaeda torture techniques.

In other words, soldiers find a torture manual and the Pentagon's decision to release it is "strange", and it's not even referred to as a manual. It's "graphic drawings of al Qaeda torture techniques", as if they could have been drawn by anyone. Ok, maybe US soldiers illustrated this thing...
Incidentally, he leads this article with a photo of blood on the floor at Abu Gharayb (a photo he has shown countless times), and goes on and on (once again) about tortures under Bush and Rumsfeld. Hey Andrew, if Al-Qaeda are really "monsters" as you put it, then why can't you ever just talk about them without dragging the US into it?

Click here to continue reading...

14 year old Girl was Sentenced to Jail for Pushing a Teacher

The Ron Jackson State Juvenile Correctional Complex

At least she's now released. More craziness from the USA. These things come in pairs; this story is a pretty good companion to the previous one. A Texas teenager, Shaquanda Cotton, was sentenced to an "indefinite" period (maximum of seven years) in a youth jail for shoving a teacher's aide at her high school. She was let go after serving one year, but only after massive protests prompted a review of the case.

Civil Rights groups, as well as the Rev. Al Sharpton got involved, and of course, they blamed the harsh sentence on racism, since Shaquanda is black (her name probably already tipped you off). Their primary evidence was that a short time before, a white girl was convicted of arson by the same judge and only got probation. Racism may or may not be the culprit; without more background I can't jump to that conclusion. But frankly, that's irrelevant, because even if there was no racism, the situation is still outrageous. And it seemed to stem not just from the judge, but from several levels of the process all compounding their errors one on top of the other.

Now I will say this, the first accounts of this story made my blood boil. "14 year old Texas girl gets 7 years in prison for shoving Hall Monitor" was a typical inaccurate headline on the case. After reading into the story, I found she did not get seven years, but a sentence of up to seven years, since she was sentenced to an "indefinite period, up to the age of 21". That "indefinite" part is the sinister lining in the fabric; juvenile prison authorities in Texas have wide latitude in deciding sentences, too wide in fact. For example, Shaquanda's sentence was extended for having contraband in her cell: an extra pair of socks and a foam cup. Quite the illicit stash she had there... In any case, aren't sentences supposed to be a judge's decision?

There were also several conflicting versions of what happened (The Wiki page on this incident gives a pretty balanced account, but that's as of this writing). Shaquanda was a good student, she was a disruptive student. She pushed the hall monitor first, or she was pushed first. Her mother said she would cooperate with terms of parole, she said she wouldn't cooperate.

But even if you believe every account where the girl was in the wrong, you still have a 14 year old girl, with no previous criminal convictions, sentenced to spend the rest of her childhood/young adult life in jail, on the whims of the Texas Youth Correction administration. All for a simple shove. The 58 year-old teacher's aide, was shaken and did go to the hospital, but there is no account that she suffered any actual injury.

The official charge was: "felony assault on a public servant". A felony? Ok, just like I said in the previous posting - didn't these things used to be handled in schools? What ever happened to simple suspension? Why, oh why do we need to involve the justice system on every small offense nowadays?

I can recall at least a dozen times I got in fights in school in the 1970s & early 80s, usually instigated by the other guy. At least once I got a black eye. Should I have called the police in each case and charged the boy with assault? Should I have filed lawsuits? Can we really afford to use the criminal justice system for each of these offenses, and even if the answer is yes, is it still desirable to do so?

Click here to continue reading...

Teen Girls Face Felony Hate Crime Charges [Updated]

Crystal Lake Central High School

I'm used to seeing this kind of nonsense and wasted police time here in Europe, but usually Americans have more sense. Now there's an anti-gay hate crime bill running through congress, so expect to see more of this in the future. Americans, this is your tax dollars at work.

According to the articles, two 16 year-old girls at Crystal Like High School in Illinois have had a running feud with a neighbor boy who is gay. So they decided to make some fliers mocking him, and saying bad things about homosexuals in general, and passed them out at their school. Bad move, and not what high school is for. But I think detention would have been the expected result circa 1960, and maybe a short suspension circa 1980. Oh but this is the enlightened 21st century, so we're better than that. Let's call the police and have the girls arrested! (In addition to suspending them the rest of the year).

I wonder if the ACLU will get involved? Naah, I wouldn't hold my breath on this one...

Since the girls are juveniles, their names have not been released. One girl is being held without bond, since she already has a long history of curfew violations and drug and alcohol possession.

But the other girl was allowed to post bond. And you'll be happy to know she's being electronically monitored and under house arrest until trial, only allowed to go to school and to other approved activities. Whew, I'll certainly breathe easier knowing this villainous teenage girl is under surveillance. If she hands out any more dangerous fliers, the feds will know right where to stop her. Where is Superman when you need him anyway?

If these fliers called for any kind of violence, then I could understand the school's reaction. But that is highly doubtful, since they haven't been charged with incitement to violence, and most prosecutors (we hope) would have considered that the more important crime here.

In any case, not only is this a case of judicial overreach and a violation of the rights of these girls, but it is essentially swindling the US Taxpayer when police and court resources are diverted from pursuing actual criminals and used in political show trials such as these.

Some further interesting discussion at Free Republic here.

Update 5/24/2007 10:50:00 PM: Some samples of comments on the Volokh Conspiracy blog:

Every time I see the old "resisting arrest" tacked on to a questionable criminal charge, I really smell a rat.
There's no doubt that it's legitimate to criminalize resisting arrest, as a general matter. But in my admittedly limited experience, if they haven't charged her with assaulting an officer, she likely didn't resist arrest, either.

I recall making the point that hate-crime laws would surely lead to stifling unpopular speech. Somebody told me I was full of it.
Well, being right about such things is depressing. I'd rather have been wrong.

the girls are standing both on the wrong side of history and between a prosecutor and his TV coverage; the technical term for this condition is "road kill."

Click here to continue reading...

Terrorism across the Globe this week

Aftermath of the mosque blast in India on Friday - view of the Char Minar gate in Hyderabad in the background

Lest we forget, Iraq and Palestine are not the only parts of the world to see violence this past week. Here's a quick rundown of terrorism, in its many different forms in the past few days:

India was a particularly volatile place. Yesterday, violent Sikh protests. On Friday, a blast at the Mecca Masjid mosque in India killed at least 13 and injured 50 others. The death toll could have been higher; two more bombs were found nearby that didn't explode. During Friday prayers (The Muslim worship day is Friday) there are thousands worshipping in that mosque. Last year, there were two similar mosque bombings during Friday prayers in India.

Counterterrorism Blog runs down more of what could have happened:

Early May 23, morning, Uttar Pradesh Police recovered 10 kg of explosives and 20 litres of ammonium nitrate from the railway station in another communal sensitive Faizabad/ Ayodhya city. On May 20, the Railway Protection Force seized around six hundred grams of highly explosive RDX from a coach of Darbhanga bound passenger train near Samastipur, Bihar. Next day (May 21), at least four bombs were recovered from inside a local passenger train in busy Howrah station in Kolkata (West Bengal). There must be some more escaped vigil eyes and already found their way near the targets.

Yesterday, a blast in a crowded shopping mall in Ankara, Turkey has been blamed on the Kurdish separatist group, the PKK (BBC is now reporting it was a suicide bombing). Last count was six killed and 100 wounded. This is particularly disturbing to me because I actually have a lot of sympathy for the Kurds and the abysmal way they have been treated in Turkey (their situation has slightly improved in recent years, but only as a result of very half-hearted reforms hastily drafted in order to keep alive Turkey's bid as a viable candidate for accession into the European Union). But no matter how badly they have been treated, who can condone killing innocent men, women, and children? The goal is to force Turkey to crack down militarily and suspend human rights, so the Kurds can claim further victim status in the eyes of the international community. It's a tactic taken straight from the Palestinian playbook...

Today in Afghanistan, which has had too many acts of violence to count this week, a suicide bomber killed two people and injured four others.

Today in Thailand, 6 people were killed in separate shootings, and 7 injured in a bomb attack by Muslim separatists. On Sunday 5 more people were killed (link to Little Green Footballs, original seems dead).

On Saturday in Somalia, sea deliveries of food aid have been halted, after pirates attacked a ship chartered by the UN food relief agency.

Also on Saturday, in Kenya, three park rangers and four poachers were killed in a gun battle.

And that's not all by a long shot...

Click here to continue reading...

George Borjas tells it like it is

Professor Borjas, an economics chair at Harvard, echoes my exact concerns over the new immigration bill at fellow economist Dani Rodrik's weblog:

Can you really guarantee that the guest workers will in fact be temporary workers? How are you going to get them to go back? Have you thought about how the U.S. judicial system will react to a lawsuit brought about by someone who doesn't want to get into the plane ride home? What's to prevent them from becoming illegal immigrants in the end? Think of the German experience. As a very wise person once said about that experience: "we wanted workers and we got people instead." [JR's note: Germany took in over 200,000 Turks as "guest workers" in the 60s and 70s. Almost all stayed, and now there are over 2 million in the country] Guest workers tend to get sick, tend to get married, procreate, etc., and all of these inevitable life events open up entitlements in the U.S. system that cannot be ignored--some of which are very costly. So your guest worker idea is, to a significant extent, a permanent immigration increase being sold as a temporary inflow. Now, you and I can debate over whether such an increase is desirable ... But the debate must be conducted in a transparent and honest way: this is not really about temporary workers at all, it's really about permanent immigration. And, again, because it is people we are importing--not just workers in a widget factory--there are non-economic issues that cannot be ignored (culture, language, security, etc.) unless you are proposing that the guest workers be packed away in some warehouse from the day they arrive until the day they are shipped back home.

Bonus - Steve Sailer writes:

Watching C-SPAN, it appears that Ted Kennedy is functioning as the MC of the Senate proceedings, a lot like he did with the 1965 immigration bill and the 1990 diversity visa bill, neither of which turned out to function at all like Senator Ted told his fellow Senators they would. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me thrice ... ah, to hell with it ...

Click here to continue reading...

Salty Lyrics

Pakistani Supreme Court in Islamabad

If you're looking for a textbook example of why free nations generally have better economies and are nicer places to live than non-free ones, here is one amusing anecdote that helps illustrate the reason. Ibrarul Haq, a pop singer in Pakistan, has a popular song that contains the lyrics "Parveen you are so salty". That makes some people unhappy, so poor Ibrarul has been summoned to Pakistan's Supreme Court to face charges...

By the way, anyone know what is the exact cultural meaning in Pakistan of a girl being "salty"?

Since Parveen is a common girls name, a lot of people are unhappy. Don't the courts in Pakistan have better things to do? Maybe their legal load is why Islamic courts are cropping up. Somehow, I don't remember legal actions over songs like "Roxanne", "Billie Jean", "Come on Eileen" or "Good Golly Miss Molly", although the US is getting there. In 2005, "OutKast", a hip-hop band, was sued over using the title "Rosa Parks" in a song (well covered on Overlawyered). As flimsy as that lawsuit was, at least that song used someone's first and last name, so it targeted a specific individual. Here we have thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of "Parveens" in Pakistan, and since every one of them can file a complaint, Ibrarul Haq faces a lot of court time. But maybe the Pakistanis will go US-style and file a class-action suit instead, so the attorneys will make millions of rupees in fees, while every "Parveen" in the country will get coupons good for free, low-salt music from Ibrarul Haq.




Like what you see? Click on any of the labels below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my feed

Click here to continue reading...

Iranian Woman Attacked by Police

Some pictures from an Iranian blog of a woman beaten by police for not properly veiling. Warning: pictures are graphic.

I wonder how long Woman's rights groups will remain silent on this. If this happened in the USA, you can bet it would be all over the world's news. Some more perspectives and links here.

Click here to continue reading...

Fighting Rages in Gaza, Lebanon [Updated]

Smoke rising from Palestinian Refugee Camp in Beirut (from AFP, via Spiegel.de)

From the headlines, someone with a cursory view of the news might assume that all the fighting in Lebanon and Gaza is due to Israeli aggression. "Israeli Air Strikes Stoke Gaza Violence" reads one typical headline. To many, it is all a fault of the "Zionists" in Israel. But look at what's really going on...

For the past few weeks (and longer) Hamas has been firing rockets into Israel, while they also fight with rival Fatah factions in the Gaza Strip (Hamas supports the Palestinian prime minister, Fatah supports the president). At least 50 Palestinians dead so far. The factions made another "truce" on Saturday, but since its the fifth one in almost a week, I'm not terribly confident... To the North, the Lebanese Army is fighting Fatah militia members in the Palestinian refugee camps, at least 60 people confirmed dead there so far. Interestingly, one of the dead is Saddam El-Hajdib, who was wanted in connection with the attempted bombing of German trains last year.

Don't so many Palestinian supporters say that if Israel just left, we would have peace in the Middle East? Maybe the Lebanese and the Palestinians need to get their own houses in order before Israel even thinks about further withdrawal. They gave up the Gaza strip a few years ago (against strong internal pressure) and the reward for that was further rocket attacks into Israeli cities.

Update 5/22/2007 10:50am: Yesterday the Lebanese army began firing shells directly into the Nahr al-Bared Palestinian refugee camp. This situation is so convoluted, I don't know if it was the right or wrong decision. But can you imagine the world outrage if the US or the UK did this? But I guess as long as its muslims killing muslims, the usual suspects such as Al-Jezeera or The Guardian aren't sure who to blame (Although the Guardian's article does try to hint at US involvement).

Click here to continue reading...

Comments

Just FYI: for awhile, comments were turned off for most articles while I did maintenance. They are open now, so feel free to use. This web site is still new, and currently under development while I constantly work to improve it, just for you.

Feel free to offer any suggestions you have about the layout. I'm still learning new html tricks for the "new blogger" system every day. One goal is that I would like to figure out a way to widen the middle column and still make the blog easily readable on mobile devices.

Click here to continue reading...

Supporting the Troops

Delivering Medical Supplies to an Iraqi Clinic, Jan 2004 (that's not me; I was the one taking the picture)

One reader wrote to me asking about how best to support the troops downrange, and about a group called "Adopt a Platoon". Its a very, very good question, because there are so many charitable groups out there.

I'm not familiar with "Adopt a Platoon", although their web site looks pretty legit. Back in 2003, my unit (the 1-1 Cav) founded an excellent charity called Iraqischools.com, although it is geared toward Iraqi children instead of the troops (If you donate, I recommend contacting them first; several different units have rotated ownership, and I'm not sure how up to date the web site is now).

The truth is, soldiers are very well supplied now, much more so than a few years ago. In my experience we simply received too much useless stuff, so here are some guidelines. I'm sure this advice applies equally toward British, Australian soldiers, or anyone else serving in Iraq, since they use the same Post Exchanges and Iraqi vendors as US soldiers do.

Some things that people often recommend (like the "Adopt a Platoon site") but are no longer much needed (at least not since the beginning of the invasion in 2003): wet-wipes, sunscreen, playing cards, paperback novels, mouthwash, toothbrushes, other small toiletries, etc. Around Christmastime, I got boxes of this kind of stuff. I gave the excess to Iraqi Army soldiers (who always need stuff), but not every soldier had contact with them, so a lot of it got thrown away.

We got a lot of religious material too, which was very seldom used, and since most of it is Christian, and in English, we can't give it to the Iraqis. The only religious material I really needed anyway is my Bible, and I already brought one with me (in electronic format on my Palm pilot). But still, Church groups were usually the most generous out there, and the gesture was always appreciated.

If you could read their minds, what most soldiers would really want most are porn, alcohol, and tobacco. But porn and alcohol are prohibited (although everywhere anyway) while tobacco isn't good for their health.

So what is left? DVDs and AT&T calling cards are always useful, a book or two also, but don't go overboard (libraries are everywhere). Most canned food ("Adopt a Platoon" says don't send pork products, but there is no prohibition on those), candy, and snack foods like beef jerky would disappear right away, and chewing gum was particularly in demand. The US military is very well fed over there now, but any variety is always a good thing. You have to consider the heat however; once my wife mailed me a bag of gummi bears, and it completely melted with all the bears fused into one perfectly smooth gummi ball... Someone once sent every solider in my unit a $20 check (I lost mine though). The gesture was far more important than the money.

I thought personal correspondence like Christmas cards or letters were always great, and they don't cost much. Letters from school children were always fun to read. Most soldiers would not write back, but a few do. If you are a woman and include an email address or an internet chat ID, I guarantee you will get responses. Keep in mind, however, that a lonely soldier is likely to form an emotional attachment this way. But if that's what you are looking for, then go ahead!

One thing I saw on the news that was NOT helpful were these ridiculous bake sales in 2006 for additional body armor for soldiers. The Army has issued all the body armor soldiers need (and with the heat they don't want any more anyway). Whether wittingly or not, these charities were used a propaganda tools by people like filmmaker Michael Moore, and actually did more harm than good to morale.

Keep in mind too that US soldiers are not the only ones suffering in Iraq. The Iraqi Army and Police contain a lot of honest soldiers that have a very, very difficult job. Iraqi civilians, especially children, need all the help they can get. International Aid groups, such as the Red Cross/Red Crescent, SaveTheChildren, or the Iraqischools.com I mentioned above are also good charities to keep in mind. If you donate to one of these, make certain that its really a neutral organization, not one of the many political anti-war groups, or fronts for Islamic militias that disguise themselves as charities.

Click here to continue reading...

Hoodwinked?

El-Masri and his lawyer earlier this year, trying to sue the CIA. Now he needs that lawyer for something else...

In January 2004, a German citizen of Lebanese origin named Khaled El-Masri was captured in Macedonia by the CIA and flown to a prison in Kabul, Afghanistan, apparently mistaken for an Al-Qaeda operative of the same name. There, he claims, he was tortured and sexually abused by CIA agents. He was released 5 months later, in May 2004.

His case was celebrated by a whole host of anti-American and far left groups in the US and Germany. Columnist Andrew Sullivan, naturally, fell for his story - hook, line, and sinker. El-Masri became the face of criticism against "secret CIA prisons" and "extraordinary rendition", and with the help of the ACLU, filed a lawsuit against the CIA. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed, and the ACLU said they were considering appealing to the Supreme Court. Meanwhile German authorities issues warrants for 13 CIA agents they claim were involved with the abduction.

Well, his supporters will probably be a bit more quiet now. Just two days ago German police arrested him near a burned down department store and charged him with arson. A judge then ordered him to be held in a psychiatric hospital; German authorities won't say why, but its a likely guess he made suicidal gestures. His attorney concedes that he did burn down the store.

According to Die Welt Online (in German), the problem arose over a dispute over an iPod that El-Masri had bought at a Metro Mart back in April in the city of Neu-Ulm (Metro is a discount store with membership required, kind of like "Sam's Club" back in America). He claimed the iPod malfunctioned just hours after purchase. When he tried to return it, the store refused, and the situation escalated into a shouting match. El-Masri spit in the face of a female employee, and was barred from the store. This month, he came back to torch the place.

Over 500,000 Euros (about $650,000) damage. Fortunately, no one was hurt

Now, of course some of his supporters will try to excuse this by claiming that his torture experiences drove him to commit this crime. In fact his lawyer suggested just that, claiming that the state didn't give him the therapy he needed after his return. Well, Germany has thousands of asylum seekers that were tortured in their own countries. Germany has even more who were tortured during/after the war by the Russians and still remember it today. There are also thousands of immigrant women currently here who are still being tortured by their husbands in abusive marriages, and girls who face genital mutilation. I don't hear about any of them taking out their frustrations by burning down buildings.

To some, his being an arsonist would have nothing to do with whether he was telling the truth about being tortured. But to me, it has a lot to do with it. It provides insights into the character of a man whose word was the only proof we had that he was telling the truth over his experiences. At the time of his story, I was very skeptical of his claims. Now I am even more so.

Update 05/20/2007 10:48:00: Comments and attention to this story at Mediankritik and Little Green Footballs.

Update 05/30/2007 15:13:00: German prosecuters announced that El-Masri also faces charges of assaulting a driving school instructor, when that instructor criticised his failure to show up for lessons.

Click here to continue reading...

Internet Censorship Spreading

Internet Cafe in Vietnam, from Reipy


According to a group called the "Open Net Initiative", government filtering of internet content is at a higher level than ever before. A similar report by Reporters Without Borders was released a year ago. From ONI:

Countries which carry out the broadest range of filtering included Burma, Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates and Yemen, the study said.

Do you see a common theme among these nations? So do I. Interestingly, the BBC failed to mention the connection with Islam. On this list, Burma is the only one that is not a majority Muslim nation (although they are a minority). It's also disturbing that the list includes Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which are supposed to be our allies in the war on terror. Somehow, I don't feel a high level of confidence in an ally that feels it needs to rigidly control information to maintain its existence.

Anyway, if you are a Westerner, you might think why should I care? What difference does it make if Iran decides to block the Mohammed Cartoons or porno sites?

Here's why:

The filtering had three primary rationales, according to the report: politics and power, security concerns and social norms.

The report said: "In a growing number of states around the world, internet filtering has huge implications for how connected citizens will be to the events unfolding around them, to their own cultures, and to other cultures and shared knowledge around the world."

In other words, nations which filter content are only getting half the picture on their TV, newspapers, and now internet. This means that these countries are reporting on corruption in Western Nations (but not their own), about Israeli air strikes in Gaza (but not the Hamas rocket attacks), and about human rights violations against Muslims in the West (but nothing about the abysmal status of women's rights in the Middle East). Many people around the world are getting a skewed picture of the West, particularly of the US, UK, and Israel, which makes it much more difficult to negotiate peace, or find a lasting common ground.

There are several rumors that constantly run rampant through the Islamic world, and the media there does little to dispel them; for example I have run into educated Arabs that believed the Jews control everything in America, that the CIA engineered 9/11, that the US is in the Middle East only for oil, and that women can't control their sexual urges (don't I wish...!)

Of course, there is another concern: simple human rights. A few years ago, Iran started to jail bloggers. Normally a just a year or two, but in 2005, they really wanted to make an example of someone. Blogger Arash Sigarchi was sentenced to 14 years in jail for crimes including: insulting the late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomenei and current Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, aiding Iran's enemies, and espionage. It happens elsewhere too. In February of this year, Abdel-Karim Nabil Suleiman, an Egyptian blogger, was sentenced by his government to four years in jail for "insulting Islam".

I am surprised that China was not on their list, since it is usually used as an example of censorship. But China has actually gone beyond crude censorship. They have essentially built a parallel internet, that only includes the content they want to see, and so blocking sites is relatively redundant, although they do it anyway. They are also known to shut down internet cafes if the users start to act a little too "counterrevolutionary" online. It's worth mentioning that Google (the current owner of blogspot, that hosts this site) is a culprit here too, for setting up their software to help China with its censorship efforts.

North Korea probably doesn't need to censor their internet very much. There is very little access anywhere, and it is only available to the Party elite. In fact, the nation is so closed off to the world that their only public site aimed at the outside world, The Korean Central News Agency, is actually based in Japan.

For pretty much the same reasons, Saddam didn't filter internet content in pre-war Iraq. He didn't have to. Internet was only available in the Cafes, and cost about $1 an hour, which was a lot of money to Iraqis then. That meant that the ones who were freely surfing the net were more likely to be wealthier Baath Party loyalists, with little incentive to rebel anyway. But before you think Saddam was a poster boy for free speech, keep in mind that he completely banned cell phones and satellite dishes, all of which have greatly proliferated since the invasion. The net result has been pretty much mixed, since while they carry the world's news, internet and satellite TV in Iraq also include insurgent run web sites and channels, including the notorious Al-Zawraa network, which I will discuss more fully in another column.

Of course, the West is not immune either. Earlier, I reported on government bullying in Finland. There is also a recent example here in Sweden reported on Gates of Vienna (a minister being disciplined for an anti-Palestinian comment someone else left on his blog). We also saw France try to block sales of war trophies on Yahoo, Germany blocking sales of "Mein Kampf" (although I can be a little forgiving on that one), and in the USA, there have been many cases of libel filed over chat room comments or blogs.

Still, all this pales in comparison to outright blocking of web sites that simply criticize state policy or the state religion. Free access to information does not necessarily make a free world, but it sure doesn't hurt.





Like what you see? Click on any of the labels below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my feed

Click here to continue reading...

The Silent Crime [Updated]

Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom

One good thing about writing my own weblog is that I get to choose what I write about. And that means I can write about things that are 1) important, and 2) underreported elsewhere. I don't have a boss that tells me to write about the current media darling of the week or about subjects that have oversaturated the media everywhere else. This story is a perfect case in point about what's wrong with the media today in the US, and much of the rest of the world. Here is one of the worst, if not the worst, criminal case you will ever read, but the wierd thing is, the national media are ignoring it. Why is that?
Caution: very graphic details follow.

Hugh Christopher Newsom, Jr., 23, and Channon Gail Christian, 21, lived in Knoxville, Tennessee. The couple was out on a date after midnight on January 7, 2007, when they were carjacked and kidnapped at gunpoint by four men, and later a woman as well. They were then driven to another neighborhood, where over the next few days they were both tortured, gang raped, and murdered. By some accounts they were mutilated as well.

In front of Channon, Christopher was first tortured, beaten and gang-raped by the men in turn. Then he was shot, body burned to conceal evidence, wrapped in a blanket, and later dumped behind some railroad tracks. Some accounts claim that his genitals were also cut off, perhaps while he was still alive.

But believe it or not, Channon's fate was even worse. She was kept alive for three more days, and repeatedly raped and tortured during that time. The torture included beatings, forcing her to drink cleaning fluid, urinating on her, and cutting off at least one of her breasts. She was eventually murdered, and her body chopped up and placed in five different garbage bags.

Fortunately, the perpetrators were caught relatively quickly. One left his fingerprints inside Christian's vehicle, and when officers arrived to question him, her body parts were found.

These grisly details are emerging now because the prosecutors have completed their investigation and the defendants are awaiting trial. So why has this received only local news coverage?

1) The victims are white while the four men and one woman accused in the crime are all black

2) Because it doesn't involve any celebrities

Instead, during this period of time we have been inundated by the Duke Rape Case fraud, Anna Nicole Smith death, and of course, the notorious Paris Hilton DWI. Stories like these make it very clear what types of crimes the media are interested in. There are also shades of the Wichita murders of 2000, another horrific case that was totally ignored by the media. Nicholas Stix at American Renaissance describes this whole unfortunate situation perfectly. Charlie Daniels also mentions it on his Soapbox, and there is a huge commentary at La Shawn Barber's Corner.

All the above sites mention the racial angle, and they are correct. If this was a white on black crime, you can bet every media outlet around the country would have descended on the town. But they don't mention the celebrity or notoriety angle. If these victims were the slightest bit well-known, ie if they were wealthy or had ever appeared on television, the media frenzy would also be in full swing.

On the other side of the coin, you have the despicable Svengalimedia, a blatant white-hating web site with headlines like "I hope Prince Harry dies in Iraq" or of one murdered white girl: "snooty slave heiress deserves to be murdered by slave descendants". I refuse to link to such an atrocious web site, but if you want to find it, there's always Google or Yahoo. About this crime, their claim is that Newsom and Christian actually wandered into a black area to buy drugs, which is a common claim they make about almost all murdered whites. But even if that were true (and no evidence for it anyway), how would it justify a crime like this?

In any case, the media is not the only story here. Let's not forget that two people were tortured and brutally murdered, and we are fortunate that the perpetrators were found very quickly. My thoughts and prayers go out to the Christian and Newsom families.

Update at 5/20/2007 06:32:00 PM: Fox News now has mentioned this story briefly, although they avoid talking about the alleged torture. Video at Hot Air. Gib at Crosblog, forgetting the particular heinous brutality of this crime, claims that the story is not being ignored, since its just one of dozens of murders daily in the US. Mark Alexander at Townhall.com calls it "a case study in journalistic malpractice." Instapundit reported that WBIR in Knoxville had to suspend comments on their site over this issue, because they became so heated. I can't find which story entry, (Instapundit's link was wrong) but it's probably this one here, where they claim "no evidence that race was a factor in killings".

Also, see update here.

Like what you see? Click on any of the labels below to read related articles, bookmark this site, or subscribe to my feed

Click here to continue reading...

US Deal on Immigration Reform [updated]

National Park Rangers detain 15 border crossers at Coronado National Park. Photo by mitchblomert.

Apparently, the Senate leadership and the President have reached a deal on comprehensive immigration reform. But its unlikely to survive the Senate and House vote without some adjustments, if it gets through at all. Frankly, from what is reported so far, I don't see how this is going to solve the problem. Not everyone will cooperate, many illegals will refuse to leave the country or go through the process, and many more will continue to cross the border. Let's take a look...

Here's the part they are using to placate the Republicans:

The plan would allow illegal immigrants to come forward and obtain a "Z visa" and — after paying fees and a $5,000 fine — ultimately get on track for permanent residency, which could take between eight and 13 years. Heads of household would have to return to their home countries first.

Ah... but what if they don't return home, or don't pay? Never fear, there is an answer:

Heads of household could come forward right away to claim a probationary card that would let them live and work legally in the U.S., but could not begin the path to permanent residency or citizenship until border security improvements and the high-tech worker identification program were completed.

You have got to be kidding me. This is their answer? Here is my prediction - if this thing goes through as written, most illegals will not pay the $5,000 and/or return home. So they will just use the "probationary" card instead. And use it. And use it, and use it again and again... As long as they can legally live in the US without fear of deportation, I don't think they will be too concerned about getting that path to citizenship. Other than voting rights, I don't see what advantage it really is for them to become US citizens. They can still enjoy all the perks, and they won't even have to register for the draft! Since this bill doesn't mention any extra funding or manpower for deportations, it has no teeth and will be ignored.

Also from the article:

"When the objections are raised as to amnesty, the question is returned, what more can be done with these 12 million undocumented immigrants?

Send them home?

What more hurdles can be placed to be sure that we do the maximum to avoid the charge of amnesty? And we are still open for suggestions. But the consequences of not moving to a solution on this issue is we have anarchy. We have uncontrolled borders," Specter said.

Workers would have to return home after job stints of two years, with little opportunity to gain permanent legal status or ever become U.S. citizens. They could renew their guest worker visas twice, but would be required to leave for a year in between each time.

But what if they refuse to return home even for one year? (and most will refuse, I promise). Then you will still have anarchy, will still have uncontrolled borders, will still have Churches trying to protect illegals from deportation, immigrant protest marches, etc etc.

How about this instead?

1) Build an effective border fence without gaps
2) Triple the size of the Border Patrol
3) Pass a law so that children born to illegals are not automatically US citizens (or just interpret the 14th Amendment as the writers intended)
4) Offer illegals aid and incentives to return home.
5) Put a moratorium on immigration from Latin American countries for at least five years, replaced with immigrants from the rest of the world instead (to prevent sections of the US separating into Spanish-speaking zones)

My prediction here. If this thing actually becomes law, it will do very little in the short run, and in the long run it will increase illegal immigration, exactly the same way the 1986 amnesty did.

Update 5/18/2007 09:56:00 PM: Several congresspeople from both sides of the issue are echoing my very points above. The American Immigration Lawyers Association said:

"A practical solution for the undocumented population is an enormously important step in the right direction, but the cost of fixing our current problems cannot be the creation of bigger problems in the future."

Sen. Barack Obama:

"We need to fix our immigration system, but we should not replace one dysfunctional, broken system with another equally troubled system"

Reports are also coming in that the new deal does include a doubling of the Border Patrol (not enough, but its a start), new fencing, and more enforcement on hiring illegals. IF these things are implemented (and that's a big "if") then this thing does actually have a chance to work. But remember, all this tougher enforcement was promised in the 1986 amnesty and then ignored. Why not separate the two issues? Double or triple the size of the Border patrol now (using the military as a temporary fill until that happens), build a fence, and enforce existing laws against employers. Once you get control of the border, then even the die hard opponents of amnesty will have far less to worry about, and will be much more amenable to a compromise.

Click here to continue reading...

"Israel should be wiped out of the face of the world"

I'm on a roll with Iran right now - Even in awkward english, the title says it all. I wonder what will Iran's apologists, who claim this expression only means "regime change", say to this?

From The Religion of Peace, via Jihad Watch

Click here to continue reading...

Speaking of Iran...

Here is the story of an Iranian Kurd who received 130 lashes for drinking two beers. But it's hard to feel sorry for him when you really read into the story...

According to the article, Mamand Mamandy, a resident of Norway but born in Iran, was visiting his mother in April 2007, when he was arrested for drinking two beers and given the lashes by police. But then the article says he came to Norway as an asylum seeker in 1999 and he and his wife are seeking Norwegian citizenship.

If that's true, then what was he doing back in Iran? When you flee a country and claim asylum, you are taking an extraordinary step. Essentially, you are claiming (and you must do it under oath) that you have a such fear of persecution back in your home country that it would be inhumane to send you back there.

For an asylum seeker to go back to his/her country on a visit is a very strong indicator that his/her application was bogus in the first place. But unfortunately, it is all too common. Here in Europe, it happens all the time, and people are not even discreet about it. Asylum seekers are rather common here, and they often go home on vacations to buy cheap gifts, come back, and show their photos to everyone in their workplace.

There is another red flag here that makes his application suspect. Under international law, asylum seekers are supposed to make their asylum claim in the first free nation they come across, not go shopping around. Well, if you look at a map, there's one heck of a lot of countries between Iran and Norway... So unless he had flown to Norway non-stop for some unrelated reason, such as a student visa or some such, he shouldn't have made his claim there anyway.

I hope this causes Norway to take a good hard look at his application again. But I doubt they will. In fact, the irony here is that his flogging is likely to strengthen his case! Most likely, the fact that he shouldn't have been there in the first place will scarcely be noticed.

It's also a testimonial to the lack of common sense on the part of Mr. Mamandy. Since he undoubtedly knew the laws on alcohol were so strict, why did he take the chance?

None of this changes the fact that I find such a severe flogging, particularly for such a trivial offense, absolutely abhorrent. Its also evidence that Iran has no respect for even the most basic legal customs, since from the article it looks like the sentence was carried out by the police with no trial or appeal process in place.

Another reason why I don't recommend vacationing in Iran, despite their efforts to promote themselves as a tourist destination.

Click here to continue reading...