Alan K. Henderson's Weblog

Lt. Gen. James Longstreet (Tom Berenger) - Gettysburg:

An Indianapolis father is appealing a Marion County judge's unusual order that prohibits him and his ex-wife from exposing their child to "non-mainstream religious beliefs and rituals."

The parents practice Wicca, a contemporary pagan religion that emphasizes a balance in nature and reverence for the earth.

The parents' Wiccan beliefs came to Bradford's attention in a confidential report prepared by the Domestic Relations Counseling Bureau, which provides recommendations to the court on child custody and visitation rights. Jones' son attends a local Catholic school.

"There is a discrepancy between Ms. Jones and Mr. Jones' lifestyle and the belief system adhered to by the parochial school. . . . Ms. Jones and Mr. Jones display little insight into the confusion these divergent belief systems will have upon (the boy) as he ages," the bureau said in its report.

If this reeks of the college speech codes that leftists love so much, yes, exactly.

I guess one of the most startling aspects of Islamic fanaticism is the extent to which the fanatics can't tolerate criticism. One of the tipoffs of how radically different our worldviews are is this demonstration by followers of an Iraqi cleric whose turban is wound too tight:

Am I happy to see these idiots insulting our flag? No. It stirs strong feelings in me, so much so that I just have to...laugh. Clearly, this flag stomping was designed to enrage U.S. forces and American public opinion so that they would overreact--in the same way that Newsweek's bogus claims of Koran desecration caused Muslims to start rioting--and killed other Muslims.

In the U.S., liberals were just thrilled at having the government fund art intended to offend Catholics (the crucifix in urine, the Madonna in elephant dung). These are about the same level of offensiveness as the supposed flushing of the Koran. These art exhibits made Catholics upset--so much so that these narrow-minded sorts wanted the government to stop taxing them to fund insults. I must have missed the Catholics who, incensed over these insults, started riots that left scores dead.

From the New York Times to USA Today to the Miami Herald, all the big guns of the mainstream media want this anti-Castro "terrorist," who was recently arrested for illegal entry into the U.S., immediately deported.

While hosting "Nightline," Ted Koppel outdid himself on the [Posada] Carriles case, interviewing Â? along with the usual Castro parrots like Anna Louise Bardach and Peter Kornbluh Â? the highly reliable and impartial legal expert, Ricardo Alarcon, also known as Castro's "President of the Cuban National Assembly."

Ted Koppel habitually sneers and snorts when interviewing a Republican senator. He was a veritable Vishinsky when interrogating Swiftvet John O'Neill. But Koppel's demeanor was markedly different as he addressed the propagandist for a mass-murdering Stalinist government, who broadcast from Havana demanding Posada Carriles' immediate extradition. Koppel mutated into a purring little puddycat.

When Nelson Mandela first visited the U.S. in 1990, Accuracy in Media termed the tumultuous and laudatory media coverage as "Mandela Mania." The hero of oppressed people everywhere!" (ABC); "A larger-than-life figure!" (CNN); "A virtual symbol of freedom!" ( CBS). "His name has a mystical quality!" gushed Dan Rather. "A worldwide hero!" continued Gunga Dan, who went on to compare Mandela to Mother Teresa.

Other reports compared Mandela to the pope, Jesus Christ and Moses. The New York Times devoted 23 pages for laudatory articles on Saint Mandela in one single week. Ted Koppel hosted an ABC "Town Meeting" with Mandela where every question was sugar and spice and everything nice.

Here's Amnesty International (again, no Klan of rabid right-wingers) in 1985 explaining why it refused to list the media's hero-saint as a political prisoner: "Nelson Mandela had participated in planning acts of sabotage and inciting violence, so that he could no longer fulfill the criteria for the classification of political prisoners."

Groom wrote the book in light of the Sept. 11 attacks – offering Americans today the perspective of a time after we had been struck at Pearl Harbor – and bounced back.

But in the upcoming May 29 issue of the New York Times Book Review, already made available to the publishing industry, critic Patricia Cohen actually derides the book for its parallels to the U.S. response to the 9/11 attacks.

She accuses Groom, a noted military historian, of conducting "a portable pep rally designed to fire up the home team for the next epic showdown. The 'Great Democracy' versus the evil Axis – or more recently, the axis of evil."

The Newsweek story probably doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Theo van Gogh's Submission, but the story did not cause these 15 deaths any more than van Gogh's movie caused his own murder. Those who acted on their murderous impulses, ultimately, bear all the responsibility. All of it. Anything less seems like our own version of the "American policy was the root cause of 9/11" argument.

What's not to enjoy about hearing a Starfleet captain say "You people are even uglier than I remember" as a negotiating ploy? That whole scene, really - Gral announcing that Enterprise is small and unimpressive, and Archer noting, "I was about to say the same thing about you." Whee, Scotty should have tried that on the Klingons when they said his Enterprise should be hauled away as garbage! I'm with Tucker: it's very refreshing to hear people speak their minds without having to hear them making speeches.

Many conservatives consider the fight over judges their political Armageddon, but conservative icon and former federal judge Ken Starr says it has gotten out of control, reports CBS News correspondent Gloria Borger.

"The confirmation process has not only become ugly and has become a shouting match," he said. "This is a radical, radical departure from our history and our traditions and it amounts to an assault on the judicial branch of government."

Starr, who prosecuted the Monica Lewinsky case against President Clinton, said the Republican plan to end the filibuster may be unwise.

"It may prove to have the kind of long term boomerang effect damage on the institution of the Senate that thoughtful senators may come to regret," he said.

I am in receipt of an e-mail written by Ken Starr in which he clarifies this, because they've been inundated at his office from people all over the place who are perplexed, curious, outraged. They don't understand. "Why in the world would you say this about the nuclear option?" Starr said, "I didn't say that about the nuclear option. I was talking about something else." Let me share with you some details. This is an excerpt of the Starr e-mail: "I have now seen the CBS report. Attached is an exchange with Steve Engle, who alerted me earlier today to the other dimensions of the wild misconstruction of what I said in the Gloria Borger interview. Here's a brief background. I sat on Saturday with Gloria Borger for 20 minutes approximately, had a wide ranging, on-camera discussion. In the piece that I have now seen, and which I gather has been lavishly quoted, CBS employed two snippets. The 'radical departure from our history' snippet was specifically addressed to the practice of invoking judicial philosophy as a grounds for voting against a qualified nominee of integrity and experience. I said in sharp language that that practice was wrong. I contrasted the current practice and that employed viciously against your father with what occurred..."

Why not, say some students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who have organized what they call the first convention for time travelers.

Actually, they contend that theirs is the only time traveler convention the world needs, because people from the future can travel to it anytime they want.

"I would hope they would come with the idea of showing us that time travel is possible," said Amal Dorai, 22, the graduate student who thought up the convention, which is to be this Saturday on the M.I.T. campus. "Maybe they could leave something with us. It is possible they might look slightly different, the shape of the head, the body proportions."

The event is potluck and alcohol-free - present-day humans are bringing things like brownies. But Mr. Dorai's Web site asks that future-folk bring something to prove they are really ahead of our time: "Things like a cure for AIDS or cancer, a solution for global poverty or a cold fusion reactor would be particularly convincing as well as greatly appreciated."

He would also welcome people from only a few days in the future, far enough to, say, give him a few stock market tips.

Dear Mr. Henderson:

Thank you for contacting me regarding campaign finance reform and "527 groups". I appreciate you taking the time to share your views.

As you know, after seven years of sometimes fierce and vigorous debate on the issue, President Bush signed the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA) into law on March 27, 2002. On December 10, 2003, the Supreme Court, in McConnell v. FEC, upheld the constitutionality of key provisions of BCRA dealing with soft money and electioneering communications. This legislation ended the practice of the President, party leaders, and members of Congress soliciting huge donations from corporations, unions, and wealthy individuals. BCRA's overriding goal was to reduce the corrupting influence of unlimited soft money contributions to political parties, usually solicited by federal candidates and office holders. There can be no doubt that this new law has improved the system. Despite the predictions to the contrary, the parties have thrived, raising as much in limited donations from individuals in this cycle as they did in hard and soft money combined in 2000.

While BCRA has proven successful, the recent growth of political committees commonly known as "527" groups, referring to their tax-exempt status under Section 527 of the Internal Revenue Code, having emerged as a new vehicle for raising and spending illegal soft money. 527 groups supporting both presidential candidates illegally raised and spent tens of millions of dollars in soft money on ads and partisan voter mobilization efforts to influence the presidential election. At the core of the financing of these 527 groups was a relatively small number of very wealthy individuals making very wealthy soft money contributions. Four individuals alone gave a combined total of $78 million to these groups! The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has shamefully failed to do it's [sic] job to require these obviously political groups to register as political committees, which would obligate them to comply with the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1974.

Contrary to the opinions of those opposed to campaign finance reform, the 527 issue as nothing to do with BCRA. It has everything to do with the original 1974 campaign finance law and the failure of the FEC to do its job to properly regulate the activities of these groups. The BCRA reforms continue to function, despite the presence of the 527 groups. It is significant that FEC-registered hard money contributions to the 2004 presidential campaign has outnumbered the 527 political groups spending by a factor of seven at the last count.

Because the FEC has failed to properly enforce federal law and require the 527 groups to register as political committees, I have introduced legislation along with Senator Feingold that would require all 527s to register as political committees unless they raise and spend money solely in connection with non-Federal candidate elections. It is unfortunate that the Congress must take legislative action requiring the FEC to properly enforce the law, but we cannot allow the obstinate acts of non-elected commissioners to obstruct the law and to dilute the influence that average Americans have in determining who will lead their country.

Again, thank you for contacting me regarding campaign finance reform. Please feel free to contact me on this or any other matter of concern.

Sincerely,

John McCain
United States Senator

JM/dsr

Reporters Without Borders today condemned a crackdown on cyber-journalists and bloggers in the southern city of Qom where Mojtaba Lotfi, who is serving a nearly four-year sentence for articles he posted on the Internet, is gravely ill in prison and where local courts are harassing two bloggers, Farid Farid Modaressi and Mohamad Reza Fathi.

"Writing about politics or even social issues is an act of bravery in Iran, especially as the local authorities are now taking over the role of gagging bloggers from the central government," the press freedom organization said.

"For this reason, we hail the human rights report which has just been adopted by the European parliament and which condemns Iran's 'abject policies' towards journalists and cyber-dissidents," the organization added.

A teacher, Fathi was first summoned on 26 March by Edareh Amaken (a police office who specializes in investigating vice) and interrogated about his blog, www.savehjam.blogspot.com, in which he has criticized the provincial government and the mayor of Saveh, near Qom. In a letter to President Mohammad Khatami, he voiced exasperation at the "scant capacity of civil servants to accept criticism."

The local police arrested him nine days later in the street, in front of his students, and paraded him handcuffed through the city. He was held for three days and was questioned again in a secret session without his lawyer being present. On his release, he was resigned to closing down his blog, despite its local popularity. Nonetheless, he will have to appear before the local judicial authorities again on various charges including publishing false information, insult, and disturbing the peace.

Modaressi, a blogger who was already imprisoned for a month at the end of last year, has received a summons to appear before a court in Qom on 14 May on charges of "insulting regime officials" in comments about the president and others in his blog, http://farid.blogset.com. He has also been summoned to appear before a Tehran court on 10 May on a charge of "attacking state security."

Reporters Without Borders has learned that the health of Lotfi, a cyber-journalist and Qom resident, has seriously deteriorated since he was sentenced to three years and 10 months in prison in February. The conditions inside the prison have reportedly aggravated a lung ailment he has had since being exposed to chemical warfare during the Iran-Iraq war.

In its report on human rights worldwide in 2004, that was approved on 28 April, the European parliament condemned Iran's "abject policies" as regards the arrest and imprisonment of journalists and cyber-dissidents and violations of press and media freedom.

Traditional Christians are openly excoriated in the mainstream press as evil, fascist, segregationist bigots. Their political speech is placed under legislative threat. Their institutions of higher education are attacked and destroyed. Naturally, America’s traditional Christians are fighting back. They’ve turned to the political process in hopes of securing for themselves a space in which to exist. Weary of being the butt of hatred by those who proclaim tolerance, conservative Christians are complaining, with justice, about the all-too-successful attempts to exclude them from society.