Showing posts with label law. Show all posts
Showing posts with label law. Show all posts

Monday, July 26, 2010

Mosque at Ground Zero: Update

As found on examiner.com

Mosque at Ground Zero: Update


Image: You Tube

Check out the Center for Security Policy’s video, No Mosque at Ground Zero:

As the ad makes clear, Shariah's followers have long built mosques on the most sacred sites of those they have conquered, brief examples:

  • Jerusalem's Temple Mount, at Constantinople
  • Istanbul's St. Sophia Basilica
  • Cordoba, Spain, the capital of the occupying Moors' Muslim kingdom

The name of the project to erect a mega mosque in the shadows of ground Zero is the Cordoba Initiative. What’s in a name? Sometimes tyranny.

Click here for a deeper look into the Cordoba Initiative and its president, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.

If one listens carefully, the nefarious designs of the nation’s enemies and/or their supporters will be heard; sometimes a simple title is the first clue to tyrannical endeavors. Sadly, far too often political correctness and political cowardice causes otherwise powerful leaders to bury their heads in the sand.

If the West continues to bury its head in the sand, regarding Islam, we may soon find the same removed from its host"- American Angle

Never forget what political correctness allowed in Fort Hood, Texas.

Update on getting the mega mosque site landmarked:

It is estimates that the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) will have a decision on the landmark status of the site before the end of summer. Click here for LPC contact information.

On July 20, The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ) submitted additional written testimony to the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) urging city officials to landmark the site where the landing gear of one of the hijacked planes from 9-11 crashed through the roof of the building.

The ACLJ is an organization dedicated to the defense of constitutional liberties secured by law.

“The ACLJ represents Tim Brown, a decorated firefighter and first responder, who survived the Twin Towers’ collapse and lost nearly 100 friends. We also represent thousands of you who have signed on to our Committee to Stop the Ground Zero Mosque - Americans who oppose building an Islamic mosque on this site which should be used to honor and preserve the memory of 9-11 and its victims.”

Please visit the ACLJ site for more information and ways to help stop the insult the mosque at Ground Zero represents.

Never Forget!

Sources: embedded in article

Related Content:

Help get the 9/11 mega mosque site landmarked

New York City voters oppose mosque near Ground Zero

The Cordoba Initiative mosque near Ground Zero

Friday, July 16, 2010

Help Get the 911 Mega Mosque Site Landmarked: Action Alert


Part of plane that crashed into the WTC, careened into the roof of
the Burlington Coat Factory, crashing through bldg landing in basement.

photo: Atlas shrugs

Help Get the 911 Mega Mosque Site Landmarked: Action Alert

Help get the Burlington Building Landmarked!

Pam Geller of Atlas Shrugs is tirelessly working on behalf of American values. Join Pam and the rest of patriotic Americans that understand the travesty and insult it is for the Cordoba House mega mosque to go up in the shadows of the World Trade Center.

The Landmark Preservation Commission will take your statements up until no later than Tuesday next week, by mail, email or fax. Contact info:

Mr. Robert B. Tierney, Chairman
Landmarks Preservation Commission
Municipal Building
One Centre Street, 9th Floor
NY, NY 10007

Phone 212 669 7817 -- public info officer and gets you a recorded announcement. 212 669 7855

The operator will direct your calls to the person you want to speak to.

Email: Use their ‘contact us’ link on their webpage for short emails: www.nyc.gov/landmarks

Or Use info@lpc.nyc.gov or info@LPC.nyc.gov for long statements

Fax: 212 669 7960

The Commissioner announced that they will accept statements from all parties via any of the above means of contacting them.

Make sure you include the building address, 45 Park Place, The Burlington Building, in the subject line of your statement.

Request a 9/11 historic district be created that would include 45-47 Park Place as its first landmarked building in the new district. Please make a separate request for the creation of the historic district as well.

For background on how the Lower Manhattan Community Board sold their souls, read Ms. Geller’s post.

For background on the Cordoba Initiative and its president Imam Feisal Rauf, click here.

Note: Ms. Geller reminds us, the key points here are the historical, architectural & cultural significance of the site. Point out the significance of the Property in light of the 9/11 attacks, given the properties' proximity to Ground Zero and the fact that pieces of one of the planes landed in the building. It was part of the attack. The landing gear of one of the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center Towers flew into the Burlington Coat Factory building and fell through the roof to the basement. The fact that the committee ignores that fact is outrageous, and disrespects the victims of 911. [Emphasis my own]

The building's ironwork was crafted by the famous architect Daniel D. Badger, known also for his famous foundry and Architectural Ironworks. Continue reading Pam Geller’s content for more background, photos and relevance of the historical significance of Mr. Badger’s work in Manhattan.

Action Alert: Help Get the 911 Mega Mosque Site Landmarked

Help get the Burlington Building Landmarked!

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Brooklyn democrats introduce bill requiring NYPD to shoot armed suspects in arm or leg

Tuesday, May 25th, 2010

Brooklyn Democrats add racial component to bill.
Not even in theory is this bill a good idea, it only works in Hollywood. Dubbed the “minimum force” bill, Assembly Bill A02952 is masked Keep Reading »

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

ACLU files suit to stop Arizona immigration law

Wednesday, May 19th, 2010
ACLU Forms Coalition with NAACP and Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (MALDEF) Obama is connected to MALDEF and SEIU, which is represented in the filed law suit
Keep Reading>>

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Mojave War Memorial Cross Stolen

Mojave War Memorial Cross Stolen

In April, ACLU Lost Campaign to Tear Down Cross

"Any nation that does not honor its heroes will not long endure"- Abraham Lincoln



A thief in the night cut down and stole the 7-foot cross that stood in the Mojave Desert for over 75-years and served as a war memorial. The National Park Service (NPS) says someone cut the metal bolts holding the metal-pipe cross to the top of Sunrise Rock and made off with it Sunday night or before dawn on Monday.

Thieves did what the ACLU could not and tore down the Mojave War Memorial Cross.

For a time line and more KEEP READING>>>



Thursday, May 6, 2010

Is the Arizona Immigration Law Unconstitutional?



Is the Arizona Immigration Law Unconstitutional?

UPDATE INCLUDES: SB1070 with the pertinent changes made by the Conference Engrossed HB2162. BLUE text indicates the original language of SB1070 and GREEN text denotes changes made by HB2162.

It is a federal requirement for legal aliens in the United States to carry immigration documentation. The new Arizona law enforces what has been a federal crime pre-dating World War II.

Let's examine some facts surrounding SB 1070 Keep Reading>>>

Tuesday, April 27, 2010

NY 13 Rep. McMahon opposes Arizona immigration law

Tuesday, April 27th, 2010
Rep. Michael McMahon (D-Staten Island/Brooklyn) has said he is "opposed to empowering local and state police as the enforcers of our federal immigration policy. They are there to protect everyone regardless of their status."
Keep Reading »

Saturday, September 12, 2009

Baltimore Prosecutor May Go After Undercover Producers of ACORN Video

By Tony Vega

Baltimore City's State Attorney, Patricia Jessamy may prosecute James O'Keefe for exposing ACORN employees in an undercover sting. That sting operation, which James O'Keefe posed as a pimp and Hanna Giles posed as a prostitute revealed some very disturbing footage about corruption inside of ACORN.

On Thursday, the undercover operatives armed with a hidden camera walked into an ACORN office in Baltimore City, MD. The man (pimp) and woman (prostitute) ask about buying a house (brothel) and how to account on tax forms for the woman's income. An ACORN employee advises the woman to list her occupation as "performance artist."





ACORN fired the two employees. Less than 24-hours later, in Washington DC a similar sting netted more ACORN employees. The DC employees were also fired. Clearly, there is a systemic problem regarding ACORN.

Rep. Conyers, Michigan Democrat, called for hearings on accusations the Association of Community Organization for Reform Now (ACORN) has committed crimes ranging from voter fraud to a mob-style "protection" racket.

Conyers abruptly reversed the decision to investigate and claimed, "The powers that be decided against it." Mr. Conyers will not elaborate.

Patricia Jessamy, Baltimore's top prosecutor, who ironically happens to be president of the Baltimore Child Abuse Center, became aware of ACORN conspiring with a pimp and a prostitute to exploit Hispanic children in a prostitution ring. Wonderful, Jessamy is the right person to bring justice forward! Think again folks, the prosecutor's office had this to say:

Baltimore, MD – September 11, 2009 – We have received inquiries from citizens and the media asking whether the Baltimore City State’s Attorneys Office would initiate a criminal investigation for acts allegedly committed at ACORN offices located in Baltimore. The only information received in reference to this alleged criminal behavior was a YouTube video. Upon review by this office, the video appears to be incomplete. In addition, the audio portion could possibly have been obtained in violation of Maryland Law, Annotated Code of Maryland Courts and Judicial Proceedings Article §10-402, which requires two party consent.

If it is determined that the audio portion now being heard on YouTube was illegally obtained, it is also illegal under Maryland Law to willfully use or willfully disclose the content of said audio. The penalty for the unlawful interception, disclosure or use of it is a felony punishable up to 5 years.
No word if ACORN was threatened with any probes. Patricia Jessamy is clearly allowing her ideology to trump her dedication to abused children.

What an Obamanation! You see, Jessamy is a huge Barack Obama supporter, Obama is a huge ACORN fan and vise versa. It's all in the family, Chicago style.



Barack Obama was a community organizer in Project Vote and served as ACORN's lawyer. He also funneled more than $800,000 to ACORN during the campaign and ACORN endorsed Obama in the primary.

We are in the Bizarro world, where the POTUS calls off investigations of voter fraud and other illegalities when it is perpetrated by ACORN and the Black Panthers, but gives the wink and nod to go after the CIA.

In the same crazy world, ACORN's Maryland top official had this to say, "We believe our country is beyond this type of attack and call on all Americans to demand that FOX stop its RACIST coverage."

The race card again! I can understand blasting FOX; after all, they are the only network with the cajones to go after Obama's peeps, but racist!?

ACORN was caught on tape advising how to shield a criminal enterprise where Hispanic girls would have been placed in a child prostitution ring. And FOX is racist for reporting it!?!

Folks, At least $53 million in federal funds have gone to ACORN and Barack Obama could funnel $8.5 billion more tax dollars to them, despite being under investigation for voter registration fraud in a dozen states.

Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-MN, wants to stop the flow of tax dollars to ACORN. On a voice vote, Barney Frank agreed but like Conyers, he had a sudden change of heart and said it was a mistake to vote yes. Frank now plans to offer another amendment to the bill on the House floor that would allow non-profits that have been indicted to receive grants.

The president should be proud.

Sources:

http://biggovernment.com/

Conyers abandons plan to probe ACORN - Washington Times

Obama to amend report on $800,000 in spending - Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

Sunday, August 9, 2009

Wise Latina Sotomayor Sworn In As First Hispanic Supreme Court Justice


Sonia Sotomayor and Barack Obama/Peter Souza,White House

By Tony Vega

Sonia Sotomayor was sworn-in on Saturday, August 08, 2009 as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. On September 08, she will be "invested as a member of the Court" in a special session of the Supreme Court. The swearing-in on Saturday by Chief Justice John Roberts allows her to prepare as an Associate Justice.

Sonia Sotomayor is the 111th Supreme Court justice, the first Latina and third woman in the 220-year SCOTUS history. Folks, history is on a roll. Forgive me if I don't get all warm and fuzzy here, but making history simply for history's sake does not by default mean it will be positive; remember not all history is good history.

At approximately 1100 hours, Chief Justice Roberts administered two oaths to Sonia Sotomayor. The first oath was a more private one and standard for all federal employees, who swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

The second oath is the judicial oath and took place in the court’s East Conference Room, where cameras were allowed to record the event. That oath under the Constitution and laws of the United States is where Sotomayor swore to “administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me.

All Freedom loving Patriots will hope that Justice Sotomayor will adhere to her oaths and has grown from the folly of her judicial activism and rhetoric displaying a degree of racial animus.

In addition to the controversy of her suggestion that a wise Latina would make better decisions than a white man, Sotomayor's more famous, or rather infamous, decision as an appellate court justice was her ruling against The New Haven 20.

In 2005, while addressing student law clerks Sotomayor revealed her judicial activism by saying, "court of appeals is where policy is made." She then immediately added, "And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don't make law. I know. O.K. I know. I'm not promoting it. I'm not advocating it. I'm — you know."

Brace yourselves; Barack Obama may conceivably make three or more Supreme Court appointments during his first term. If Obama's brief history is any indication, we know he has a penchant for the radical.

Sonia Sotomayor replaced the retiring David Souter. In addition to Souter, Justices Ginsberg, 76, and Stevens, 89 may retire.

This year, making history is chic right long with American Idol and fawning over morally corrupt celebrities. Politics is certainly not an area where one will find moral fortitude, however, it is disappointing when a SCOTUS appointment is confirmed via political expedience over what is best for the nation.

Republican Senators facing reelection know that their constituents will expect them to honor their base and the principle of country first. All 12 Republican Senators facing reelection voted against Sotomayor.

With the Democrats in power, Sotomayor was easily confirmed by sixty-eight Senators to thirty-one. 57:58 Democrats voted yes, while Sen. Kennedy suffering from cancer did not vote. Sen. Sanders of Vermont and Sen. Lieberman of Connecticut, both Independents that caucus with the Democrats voted for confirmation.

The following are the nine Republicans that voted to confirm:
Sen. Lamar Alexander (Tenn.)
Sen. Christopher Bond (Mo.)
Sen. Susan Collins (Maine)
Sen. Lindsey Graham (S.C.)
Sen. Judd Gregg (N.H.)
Sen. Richard Lugar (Ind.)
Sen. Mel Martinez (Fla.)
Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine)
Sen. George Voinovich (Ohio)

For the complete Senate roll call visit here.

Resources:

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/08/06/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry5220908.shtml

http://ninthjustice.nationaljournal.com/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090808/ap_on_go_su_co/us_supreme_court_sotomayor

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/09/us/politics/09sotomayor.html?_r=3

Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Cash for Clunkers Drives Head On Into Freedom

By Tony Vega

Remember that cool new government program that promised 3,500 - 4,500 bucks for your old gas-guzzler to be used for the purchase or lease of a new vehicle? That program, Cash for Clunkers, sank quicker than...well... an Oldsmobile in the Chappaquiddick.



On the surface, this seems like a pretty good idea. An incentive to buy, stimulate the economy, and even help the environment by getting rid of old clunkers for more fuel-efficient cars. You better get Maaco baby, because the rusty truth is showing up big time.

Let's take a look at this government-induced boondoggle.

There had been a $1 billion budget for rebates for new car sales in the program. It went bankrupt after the first week. In addition to a failed government plan, the flawed economics is simply this, we are subsidizing taxpayers with taxpayer money. That is not going to help our (USA's) net worth.

OK, so what, it's our money, why should the fat cats benefit and not us? The simplicity and emotions behind that is what drove so many folks to the car dealer. I am not saying you should have stayed home. But don't candy-apple coat it folks, you are going down to get a piece of a new welfare program paid for by the taxpayer.

Additionally, there is something fundamentally wrong with destroying vehicles that are still viable while increasing more debt. This will not earn us any A-pluses in economics-101. Whatever, get while the getting is good.

As per the government, "the program requires the scrapping of your eligible trade-in vehicle, and that the dealer disclose to you an estimate of the scrap value of your trade-in."- cars.gov

The Wall Street Journal summed it up this way, "By this logic, everyone should burn the sofa and dining room set and refurnish the homestead every couple of years."

This program very well may be a shot in the arm, almost like a hit on the ol' turbo boost, it will get you there fast, but in the long run it will cost you more money and make you run out of gas quicker; yeah I know, but the ride was fun.

Secondly, the bankruptcy of this program should sound off like an old-fashioned Mac truck air horn. How on God's green earth, pardon me, let me re-phrase that for my more PC readers; how on this spontaneously combusted green earth can you expect this government to run health care or crap & trade, when they can't even manage to run Cash for Clunkers?

Lastly, certainly not least, in fact the most important aspect of this failed policy is how the government is driving this program head on into Freedom. This Cash for Clunkers program has a dangerous stipulation when you or the car dealer logs onto the government's web site.

That stipulation was publicized by Glenn Beck and below is the video explaining it. I implore you to check it out and afterward reflect on all those complaints about the Patriot Act.

The feds tell us, "Consumers should expect that all information collected through the CARS Program will be kept confidential. Social Security numbers are not required for a CARS transaction." - cars.gov. BUT, what they are not telling you is this:

"This application provides to the DoT CARS system. When logged on to the CARS system, YOUR COMPUTER is considered a FEDERAL COMPUTER SYSTEM AND IT IS PROPERTY OF THE United States Government, any and all uses of this system and ALL FILES on this system may be INTERCEPTED, MONITORED, RECORDED, COPIED, AUDITED, INSPECTED, and DISCLOSED to authorized CARS, DoT and law enforcement personnel, as well as authorized officials of other agencies, BOTH DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN." (Emphasis my own)




The House just approved $2B more for Cash for Clunkers. Oh, I forgot it is the program formerly known as Cash for Clunkers. Yes, the Obamacracy as with many pop icons changed its name; it is now officially dubbed the Car Allowance Rebate System (CARS).

Thursday, July 30, 2009

ACLU Targets War Memorial


Mojave Desert Cross, Don't Tear Me Down!

By Tony Vega

"Any nation that does not honor its heroes will not long endure"~ [attributed to] Abraham Lincoln

In 1934, the VFW erected a wooden cross in the Mojave Desert as a memorial to their fallen brethren. The wooden cross was later converted to white painted metal and stands 8-feet tall. The current version was constructed and maintained by Henry Sandoz. Mr. Sandoz takes care of the area in memory of his late friend, J. Riley Bembry, who helped construct the original cross.



In 1994, the VFW donated the land to the government for the Mojave Land Preserve. The preserve encompasses 1.6 million acres of the Mojave Desert in California and falls under the auspices of the National Park Service (NPS)

In 1999, the ACLU demanded the Mojave Cross be removed because its display on federal land violated the Constitution's establishment clause. The memorial received widespread support and rankled only a former NPS employee, Frank Buono.

In 2000, the NPS exchanged several letters with the ACLU in an attempt to save the memorial. The ACLU responded by threatening to go after individual park employees if the memorial was not torn down. The NPS relented and was bullied into compliance.

In December 2000, Rep. Jerry Lewis got involved and had an appropriations bill disallow the NPS from using government funds to dismantle the cross, which gave the memorial a well deserved reprieve.

In March 2001, the ACLU made good on its threats and filed their lawsuit. In December 2001, Lewis rallied again and successfully had the Mojave Cross declared a national memorial in honor of World War 1 veterans.

In 2002, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Timlin ruled in favor of the ACLU and ordered the cross removed, but he failed to set a deadline. The Justice Department slowly navigated the murky waters of the courts decision and the Congressional ruling that designated the Mojave Cross a World War 1 national memorial.

During the legal maneuvering, the Justice Department had the cross covered by a plastic tarp. Patriots and Defenders of Freedom did not stand for that and removed the covering.

Henry and Wanda Sandoz landowners in the confines of the Preserve and caretakers of the Memorial Cross donated five acres of their own property to the NPS. This donation enabled the one-acre encompassing the Mojave Cross to be returned back to the VFW.

The ACLU did not relent and argued that the land transfer was unconstitutional, the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed. The Bush administration appealed that decision and asserted that the land transfer was "an eminently sensible and constitutionally permissible way of resolving any establishment clause problem."

In February 2009, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the Mojave Cross case (now known as Salazar vs. Bruno). The Mojave Cross, a designated World War 1 memorial is now covered by a plywood box awaiting that decision.

The transfer of the federal land back to private ownership and in the hands of our defenders of Freedom not only enriches the government but also satisfies any "establishment clause" issues.

The devil is in the details, the ACLU does not care about civil liberties. They simply wish to target and attack sacred and traditional American symbols to further a radical agenda. They have the money, ergo the power to wield their ugly influence.

"It is bad enough to say that the veterans' memorial is unconstitutional, but it is outrageous to say that the government cannot give the monument back to the people who spilled their blood and put it there in the first place."- Kelly Shackelford, chief counsel of Liberty Legal Institute and attorney for the veterans groups.

An ACLU victory will put other veterans memorials in the cross hairs. Folks, do not allow this [Anti] American Civil Liberties Union to tear down this war memorial.

Resources:

www.donttearmedown.com

http://www.nps.gov/archive/moja/adminhist/adhi6.htm

http://www.saveourmemorials.com/

Friday, July 24, 2009

Professor Gates, Sgt Crowley and Obama the Divider


Professor Gates, front cuffed.
Image source, Carter/AP


By Tony Vega

Click here to review the police report.

What we know according to various news reports and witness accounts are that Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. returned home from a trip to China. Gates came home to a faulty front door due to a prior break-in. This prompted him and another person to force entry by shouldering the back door.

The next turn of events is a positive one. Far too often apathy sets in and folks in communities across the nation look the other way, but thankfully not Mr. Gates' neighbor. A neighbor reported men breaking into the house, unaware that it was the professor returning home.

Sgt. James Crowley of the Cambridge Police Department responded to the 911 report of two black men with backpacks breaking into a home. Upon arrival, Crowley observed a male inside of the home. Crowley asked the male to step out onto the front porch, unaware that this male was Mr. Gates. Harvard professor Gates opened the front door and exclaimed "Why, because I'm a black man in America!?"

By all accounts, it seems that Mr. Gates took umbrage over being challenged by a uniformed officer. The sergeant asked for identification, Gates initially refused and challenged the officer. Mr. Gates also berated the officer and repeatedly called him a racist.

In the presence of the police, Gates made a phone call and accused Crowley of being a racist to a third party. Sgt. Crowley says the acoustics of the kitchen and foyer area made it difficult to make radio transmissions over the yelling of Mr. Gates. Upon obtaining an earful and identification from Mr. Gates, Crowley informed Mr. Gates that he would continue speaking to him outside of the home, at which time Harvard professor Gates sated, "ya, I'll speak to your mama outside."

As Sgt. Crowley descended the front stairs of the home to the street area, Mr. Gates followed and continued his barrage of insults and tumultuous behavior, causing a crowd to gather. Gates did not cease this behavior upon threat of arrest. Mr. Gates was subsequently arrested for disorderly conduct, which was later dropped by prosecutors.

Professor Gates charges racism. Barack Obama charges stupidity on the part of police and hints to racial profiling by saying, "that there is a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately, and that's just a fact."

Here are some additional FACTS, perhaps Obama the divider would care to learn about; Sgt. Crowley is an expert on racial profiling and teaches a course of how not to single people out because of their ethnic background or culture.

Sgt. Crowley also demonstrated his lack of bias when he administered mouth-to-mouth resuscitation on NBA star Reggie Lewis who suffered a fatal heart attack. Remember folks, it is not mandated for cops to perform mouth-to-mouth resuscitation, that is a personal choice.

Barack Obama may have hoodwinked the nation when he ran on a platform of unity. Obama may have perpetrated a con when he claimed he was not from the same racially perverse cloth that his mentor and preacher man was.

The Jeremiah Wrights of the world claim a black person cannot be a racist because they are not in a position of power to be a racist. When you make a negative claim against another person because of his race that is a racist point of view, period.

When a white man is accused of being a racist because he arrives on a scene in a police uniform to investigate a crime and he is accused of being a racist and stupid, where is the charge of bias for the accusers?

The support for Professor Gates is divided along racial lines and common sense falls into the gap. Instead of cautioning the nation to assess by fact before judgment is levied, Barack Obama stoked the flames of resentment and played the role of a race-arsonist. Jeremiah will be proud.

Another fact that is not mentioned by Barack Obama is that Sgt. Crowley front cuffed Mr. Gates. Procedure is to rear cuff prisoners, but he considered Mr. Gates' condition (Gates walks with a cane) and made sure he was comfortable.

Barack Obama likes to quote "facts," let's take another look at a factual sequence of events that Barack Obama and the rest of us are privy to; Mr. Gates, a burglar suspect, was not stopped at gun point, not ordered onto the ground AND given the benefit of the doubt, that he was the homeowner BEFORE verifying his identification.

Folks, I don't know about you but that does not sound like racial profiling to me. Wait, maybe it was, perhaps if it was a white man Sgt. Crowley would have used sound police tactics and rear cuffed the suspect and verified later.

Perhaps, Sgt. Crowley gave Mr. Gates the benefit of the doubt because he was afraid of being called a racist. Damned if you do, damned if you don't! Perhaps, the good sergeant should have acted in a sound tactical manner and treated the man that just shouldered his way into a home as a burglary suspect.

Perhaps, Barack Obama was in fact listening to Jeremiah Wright after all.

Police Reports of the Gates and Crowley Incident



Thanks
Free Republic


Click on images of Police Reports to enlarge

1:


2:

3:

Thursday, July 16, 2009

The UK Gun Ban




By Tony Vega

"An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life." - Robert A. Heinlein, American novelist and former liberal

The English are perceived to be the leaders of etiquette and masters of a polite society. Quite often, too often, it is American chic to consider our neighbors in the UK a model to emulate. Perhaps, to the American ear the English tone represents a higher intellect.

This is not to denigrate our UK neighbors, but rather to encourage our American citizens to assess by fact and not by fad. The trail blazing UK held the distinction of having the toughest firearm restrictions of any democracy and their 1997 handgun ban became the "gold standard" of gun control.

How has that UK gun ban been working?

  • In the four years from 1997 to 2001, the rate of violent crime more than doubled.
  • Your chances of being mugged in London are now six times greater than in New York.
  • England's rates of assault, robbery, and burglary are far higher than America's.
  • 53 percent of English burglaries occur while occupants are at home, compared with 13 percent in the U.S., where burglars admit to fearing armed homeowners more than the police.
In a [2002] United Nations study of crime in 18 developed nations, England and Wales led the Western world's crime league, with nearly 55 crimes per 100 people. [1]

Gun crime in London is increasing so rapidly that police fear they may not have the resources to cope. In a 2001 BBC report, officers stated there had been a 100% increase in firearms-related crime in the capital. [2]

"When Seconds Count, the police are minutes away."- Viral Internet quote

Northern Ireland [home of the IRA] is the only part of the British Isles where significant numbers of civilians are granted permits to carry a concealed handgun for self-defense. According to the International Crime Victim Survey released in August ’01, Northern Ireland had one of the lowest levels of victimization of any of the 15 industrialized countries studied and England had the highest. [3]

To be fair to our English neighbors, 2007 crime stats show a leveling off of overall gun crimes, despite an increase in homicide. [4] Publicizing gun crimes, however, is becoming a bone of contention among UK officials.

After a high profile shooting death of an 11-year old boy, the UK Shadow Home Secretary, noted the huge increase in gun crimes since the ban and claimed the ministers were putting out "misleading and inaccurate figures." [5]

Jack Straw, the UK Justice Secretary, admitted the increase in gun-related incidents, but cited an overall drop in crime crediting the government's efforts. David Cameron, Tory leader, accused Mr. Straw of "self satisfied comments" and "complacency." Cameron also accused ministers of spinning statistics. [5]

With the exception of gun-related deaths, 2008 UK crime stats show a significant rise in gun crimes, the biggest since 2004. [6] The overall picture since the UK gun ban clearly shows that gun control is not crime control and only serves to empower the criminal and inhibit the liberty of her people.

A Church of England vicar had this to say, "It seems as if we have slipped into some bizarre parallel universe where the basic rules about the way human beings communicate have been suspended. What can we say or do? We feel so powerless. "We need to ask hard questions about a kind of society that makes possible such a callous disregard of human life." [5]

By adopting a radical gun ban, the UK abandoned the principles of their own 1689 Bill of Rights calling for the citizenry to "have arms for their defence." The abandoning of such principles is not a practice that a Freedom loving nation desiring the safety, pursuit of happiness, liberty, and justice for all should emulate.

Remember folks, it is the law abiding that abides the law. The bad guys will not comply with gun laws and will remain armed. So what is the purpose of any nation stripping her people from the right of self-defense?

"No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"- Thomas Jefferson

What my dear Freemen and women are you willing to give up in the name of progressive ideology?

Resources:

1. Gun Control's Twisted Outcome: Restricting firearms has helped make England more crime-ridden than the U.S. - Reason Magazine
2. BBC News | UK | Police fears over rising gun crime
3. http://dvc.org.uk/dunblane/dbpolicy.pdf
4. BBC NEWS | UK | Analysis: UK gun crime figures
5. Another arrest as Croxteth pays tribute to Rhys | UK news | The Guardian
6. 28 gun crimes committed in UK every day - Telegraph

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

The New Haven 20 Get Some Justice


New Haven 20, photo source: NY Post

By Tony Vega

No Justice, No Peace!

The New Haven 20 is a group of mainly white firefighters that were discriminated against because they had the audacity to hope. Their hope was not based in false promise but in merit, you see in 2003 they studied hard, made sacrifices and took a promotional exam and passed. The problem was that their black colleagues did not score high enough to be promoted and the test was thrown out.

The brave firefighters challenged the city of New Haven claiming discrimination. Barack Obama's nominee to the highest court in the land Sonya Sotomayor sided with New Haven's discriminatory action. On Monday, June 29, the Supreme Court overturned Sotomayor's ruling. The SCOTUS decision affirmed that civil rights law could also protect whites from such discrimination.

"Race-based action like the city's [New Haven, Conn.] in this case is impermissible."- Justice Anthony M. Kennedy

Sotomayor and the three judge panel of the U.S. 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals opined that the white firefighters do not have equal protection under Title V11 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, they did claim sympathy for the firefighters namely one man with dyslexia that overcame serious challenges to pass the exam. Sotomayers' sympathy and $2.25 would get me a ride on a NYC bus.

That decision spurred a dissenting response by judge Jose Cabranes, ironically a Sotomayor mentor; "The opinion [Sotomayer's and the three judge panel ]contains no reference whatsoever to the constitutional claims at the core of this case, and a casual reader of the opinion could be excused for wondering whether a learning disability played at least as much a role in this case as the alleged racial discrimination, This perfunctory disposition rests uneasily with the weighty issues presented by this appeal."

The SCOTUS did take on the weighty issues and overturned Sotomayor's ruling.
While on a Judge’s panel in the early 1990‘s, Sotomayor boasted to be "the perfect affirmative action baby" and admitted that “my test scores were not comparable to my colleagues at Princeton and Yale.

Her more famous viewpoint derived from a 2001 speech, which garnered quick attention, and an even quicker excusal from the left. The following are excerpts of that speech:

Sonya Sotomayor declared that the ethnicity and sex of a judge “may and will make a difference in our judging.” This ran counter to both Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg and retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor who opined that a wise old man and a wise old woman would reach the same conclusion when deciding cases.

Sotomayor continues, “I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life.

In 2005, while addressing student law clerks Sotomayor had this to say, "court of appeals is where policy is made.” She then immediately adds, “And I know — I know this is on tape, and I should never say that because we don’t make law. I know. O.K. I know. I’m not promoting it. I’m not advocating it. I’m — you know.

Perhaps, these facts about Sotomayor will make it more clear to the nation as to why she is so attractive to Barack Obama. Clearly, Sotomayor wears the cloak of a judicial activist. Isn't that what the people want on the SCOTUS? No? Then why vote for a man who has the power to make those appointments and demonstrated his entire life not for equal justice but socially engineered justice, be it economical or appointment.

Is Sonya Sotomayor a racist or a race hack? Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of man...or woman. But I can tell you this her track record at the minimum exposes a race activist more along the lines of Al Sharpton than Martin Luther King. Again, that's what the sheep...ahem...the people asked for.

While on the subject of fairness, yes racial equality for all usually musters up fairness in my warped mind, a quick look at the man voted as POTUS will also reveal the prevailing double standard in this nation. A white man would not be able to distance himself from the R label if he spent his adult life in a religious front like TUCC, wallowed in racist hate like pig on stink, and allowed the grand wizard of hate to baptize his children.

Barack Obama has always gravitated toward the fringe elements of society not in an effort to embrace Freedom and democracy, just the opposite, to embrace ideals from Frank the Communist, Ayers the terrorist/anarchist and Wright the racist. There is something about Sonya Sotomayer that Barack Obama likes.

Who would have thought that in America such a man with such indoctrination would rise to such power? That is supposed to be the story of a radical nation, well may be it is.

A major SCOTUS ruling has reversed persistent, unjust, unfair, and unacceptable racism. The racists have been called out by the Supreme Court jurists. Reverse racism is racism, period.” - Andrew Benjamin, great American

I hope the New Haven 20 relish this decision, justice like this may not last while the radicals are in control.

Sources:

1. nytimes.com
2. politifact.com
3. cnn.com
4. nypost.com