<![CDATA[It's Happening Forums]]>

<![CDATA[It's Happening Forums]]> http://wincoast.com/forum/ ItsHappening is a non profit discussion forum provided as a free mental health sounding board for adults over age 18 no political, religious, or national affiliation and is available to everyone globally. en Fri, 18 May 2012 04:55:21 GMT vBulletin 60 http://wincoast.com/forum/images/misc/rss.png <![CDATA[It's Happening Forums]]> http://wincoast.com/forum/ <![CDATA[Jon Lovitz: Obama A "F*cking A**hole" With His Tax Talk YouTube XXX]]> http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105779-Jon-Lovitz-Obama-A-quot-F*cking-A**hole-quot-With-His-Tax-Talk-YouTube-XXX&goto=newpost Fri, 18 May 2012 04:54:41 GMT http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&fe...&v=5OhnQEP2Hl4

:happy_01: :add09: ]]> American_Jihad http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105779-Jon-Lovitz-Obama-A-quot-F*cking-A**hole-quot-With-His-Tax-Talk-YouTube-XXX Will a military coup save america http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105778-Will-a-military-coup-save-america&goto=newpost Fri, 18 May 2012 04:23:16 GMT *WILL A MILITARY COUP SAVE AMERICA?* Image: http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/2152/milicoup.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/201/milicoup.jpg/) JOE CORTINA IS AN EX GREEN BERET, a former airborne special operations officer and US Army Training Center commander. Joe Cortina’s...

WILL A MILITARY COUP SAVE AMERICA?

JOE CORTINA IS AN EX GREEN BERET, a former airborne special operations officer and US Army Training Center commander.

Joe Cortina’s subsequent experiences as an intelligence investigator and anti-terrorist adviser brought him to such hotbeds of turmoil as the State of Israel, adjacent Middle East nations, and Central America.

Joe Cortina’s Web Site, “My Name Is Joe Cortina,” is a showcase of crimes committed against humanity by the Zionist global elite. Here.

Will A Military Coup Save America? | Real Jew News ]]> Conspiracy Theories American_Jihad http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105778-Will-a-military-coup-save-america Why America Needs Mitt Romney http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105777-Why-America-Needs-Mitt-Romney&goto=newpost Fri, 18 May 2012 04:05:06 GMT Image: http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/4075/19313npadvhover.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/694/19313npadvhover.jpg/) *Why America Needs Mitt Romney* Why America Needs Mitt Romney « Paul M. Done (http://pauldone.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/why-america-needs-mitt-romney/)

Why America Needs Mitt Romney

Why America Needs Mitt Romney « Paul M. Done

]]> American_Jihad http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105777-Why-America-Needs-Mitt-Romney A 29-year-old on the difficulties of landing a first job http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105776-A-29-year-old-on-the-difficulties-of-landing-a-first-job&goto=newpost Fri, 18 May 2012 02:16:11 GMT http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/personal-finance/rob-carrick/a-29-year-old-on-the-difficulties-of-landing-a-first-job/article2434807/singlepage/#articlecontent Reader Letter A 29-year-old on the difficulties of landing a first job Rob Carrick Globe and Mail Update Published... http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...articlecontent

Reader Letter
A 29-year-old on the difficulties of landing a first job
Rob Carrick
Globe and Mail Update
Published Wednesday, May. 16, 2012 6:36PM EDT
Last updated Thursday, May. 17, 2012 1:46PM EDT

My latest column discusses how older generations must help dislocated young adults now – or forfeit their own financial well-being later. If you want to know what it's like to look for a job today as a young adult, read this e-mail from a frustrated but very eloquent 29-year-old. His name has been left out so as not to prejudice his job search.

Hi Rob,

I thought I'd thank you for digging into the issues facing Millennials (a term I abhor, but anyhow) as they finish school and enter the workforce. Perhaps that should read "enter the ranks of the unemployed," but for some incomprehensible reason, I'm still hopeful. Don't worry though, it's fading fast!

My story's about the same as most, but I'm hoping that it might shed some light on some other issues that we face in working with what we've been dealt. I finished up at university at about the same time that Lehman Bros. went under, after having seen the very obvious warning signs at Bear Stearns et al. Admittedly, this wasn't great timing, but I thought that with a lot of hard work, sacrifice, and a bit of luck, things would work out alright. What I got instead was this:

- Short-term contract position after short-term contract position.

- Wages that weren't at all related to the realities of short-term contract positions, ie: way too low to make up for the short-term, no-benefits nature of the work.

- Experience that was almost completely unrelated to anything I was interested in, career-wise.

- Hiring freezes at a ludicrous number of places.

- A complete inability to "grow up," so to speak

At the age of 29, I've likely forever lost the following opportunities due to cost and probable inability to make up for lost wages and career potential:

- Getting married.

- Having children.

- Owning a home that's bigger than 500 square feet. (hint: that's not big.)

- Studying any more, whether that means grad school, law school, or even just night classes at a random community college.

- Retirement. Sure, I'd love to be investing for it. But with what money?

Am I bitter about all of this? Not entirely, because it all just sort of works itself out. If I can't get married (dating is tough when you're broke) and have kids, I don't need a home bigger than 500 square feet, nor is more study to obtain employment that I'm not only happier with and better at than what I already do but also more lucrative really necessary, since I'll only be supporting myself. As for the issues revolving around savings, investments, and retirement, you may be surprised to find out how much happier one can be if you simply accept that you'll be working until very close to your death. Why? Assuming I do end up doing this, I'll have a consistent income coming in until death, which should make up for lack of retirement funds.

What makes me extremely bitter is how poorly people of my age and younger have been treated by potential employers. You specialize in economics, personal finance, and business, but not what some call "Human Resources." Yes, the economy, inflation, etc etc etc, all make up part of the problem, but one of the biggest and most overlooked reasons for the issues surrounding people my age is the HR department. How so? Let me walk you through the steps involved in applying to an "entry-level" position these days.

- Troll career websites, Craigslist, university career centres, and professional associations for potential job opportunities, networking events, or possibilities to reach out for an informational interview.

- Line up 100+ legitimate job opportunities that you are actually interested in and qualified for (that's important), complete with job descriptions and a contact person if you can find one, which you usually can't no matter how much research you do. Why 100+? You'll see…

- Perform in-depth research on the 100 or so different companies you're applying to, including history, financials if they're publicly traded, growth plan, and what you can tell of their corporate strategy from public sources. Then scour the web for any press coverage of said 100+ companies, because the more you know the better off you are.

- While you're at it, be sure to reach out for 12 or so informational interviews. They're a great way to get more info on your potential career paths and gain contacts.

- Also, attend a few networking events, which will inevitably end up costing you a significant amount of money. Console yourself with the knowledge that your $45 event ticket (you scammed the student rate, after all) "entitles" you to a "free" drink. You'll have plenty of time to sip on it too because pretty much no one will be interested in talking to you, possible exception being other newly finished students doing exactly what you're doing.

- Prepare your cover letters. This means 100+ completely custom, tailored, impeccably written letters that will likely end up being addressed to something along the lines of "Dear Hiring Manager."

- Email, mail, courier, or otherwise deliver your 100+ application packages.

- Wait. While waiting, do whatever you can to find 100+ more job opportunities that fit your skills, education, experience, and interests.

- Repeat steps 3, 4, 5, and 6.

- Give yourself a break. You've earned a beer, though you can't actually afford one. Call home, maybe mom and dad will sense that desperation in your voice that stems from only having had one meal per day for a week, take pity on you, and send you a bit of cash. Then go buy that $3 tall can of cheap beer from the liquor store. Oh, you thought I meant a bar? Silly you, that's far too expensive! Be sure to feel so guilty about that beer that you end up not drinking it and leaving it hidden at the back of your fridge. This will help you cope with the feelings of shame that come with having dared spend $3 on a beer when tap water is so much cheaper.

- After a minimum of a week, but more likely a month, you'll have anywhere between one to eight responses from HR departments, depending on whether you sent 100+ or 200+ application packages. These responses will excite you. That's a mistake, because a half to two-thirds of them will be generic, computer generated "thank you for applying" emails that will be utterly meaningless and contain no usable, actionable information. Out of whatever's left, consider yourself lucky if you get a single interview, which will likely be done over the phone. In person?!? Lucky. Very, very lucky.

- Have your interview. You'll be one of 12 or so being interviewed, so good luck.

- Send thank-you emails to interviewers.

- Find 100 more job opportunities, repeat steps 3 through 6 with them while waiting for word from and following up with HR at the company you interviewed with.

- After about 3 weeks, get an email response from the HR people at the company you interviewed with. Wait an hour or two to open it, because you're nervous, excited, and generally hopeful. Open it and feel the crushing disappointment of being told you won't be making the second round of interviews.

- Repeat steps 1 through 14. Ad nauseam.

Those 14 steps assume everything goes well and roughly according to plan. They don't, and I've got a couple of recent examples for you. I've recently interviewed with 2 companies, for jobs I'm very much qualified for. I've made it through 2 rounds of phone interviews for one job (it's a province away, otherwise I'd have interviewed in person the second time), and 1 phone interview, an in-person interview, and a reference check for the other job. The interview processes for both positions started at roughly the same time, about a month ago. I last talked to each company about 2 weeks ago. Despite diligent but not annoying follow-up, I've gotten exactly zero information as to the state of my application with both companies. Until today. One emailed me a meaningless "We're in the final stages of the process" email, which I should have expected. The other I managed to get on the phone. The conversation on her end consisted of random combinations of the words "um, yeah, see, like, I don't have, any info, but, if, when, there, you, will be contacted." What do I expect to come of all of this? About a month from now, I'll likely randomly get an email from an HR person at one of the two (but not from both) companies, telling me that while they really liked me, I wasn't the right person for the role and they hired someone else. That's it. The kicker? They likely didn't hire anyone at all and wasted everyone's time.

At this point, you're probably wondering why I'm not looking at retail, restaurant, or coffee shop jobs. The truth is that I am, but due to my resume, experience, and other such things, these places assume I'll leave as soon as something "corporate" pops up. Fair enough, and if I'm honest I probably would, but this all leaves me rather short of options. Also, due to job-hunt and financial issues, my age group finds it extremely hard to go out and be in social settings, so the usual networking and schmoozing that previous generations indulged in isn't nearly as possible for us, nor can we be as good at it when we have the chance to. Lack of practice has that effect.

I should also tell you that not everyone I know has suffered the same fate as I have. A select few of my friends made it out of school and got decent jobs. Most still aren't making enough to save, invest, or buy a place. Many barely get by, doing low-level work they don't really believe in with little job security. Exactly one of my friends has "made it," so to speak. He's on partner-track at one of the big accounting firms. Sounds good, right? It is, except for a few minor issues. First, the likelihood of ever reaching partner is so slim that it's essentially non-existent. Second, the hours have nearly killed him. His average workweek is 65-70 hours. Average. It's higher some weeks, topping off at nearly 90 hours/week. Yes you did read that right. He and his wife did at one point own a rather nice place. His wife still does, but with the guy she's with now that her lawyers are finally done with my friend through the divorce process. Happily, his firm offered him legal assistance. Why? Doing so made it a lot easier for him to continue working an average of 65-70 hours/week. How kind of them…

There's a glimmer of hope in all of this, and it's the one I'm still reaching for. Seeing as how a job that provides a decent income, some job stability, home ownership, savings, investing, and retirement are all but out of reach for me, I've discovered a way to make life bearable. I call it the "lifestyle job," and it consists of working at companies that are involved in non-work things, say sports or hobbies, that you absolutely love. In my case these include skiing, cycling, the outdoors in general. Yes, the salaries and benefits are generally terrible, but these companies make it bearable. They provide access to activities you love at a significantly discounted rate, cheap or free gear, and time to play. Making $36 000/ year is a lot more bearable when you start with 3 weeks/year, the office has a bouldering room and a bar, you can bring your dog to work (just kidding! You can't afford a dog), you get gear you need to do what you love for next to nothing, and you've got time to go out and enjoy the sports you love. I'll never own a condo in a ski town, but at least I'll be able to make day trips, right?

It's far from what I wanted. I wanted 65 hour weeks in a high pressure corporate environment. I wanted the tailored suits, the chance at a high income, the BMW, the prestige, the respect, and the power. I wanted to be someone. I wanted to be able to afford to donate to charities that are important to me. I was considering children, marriage, the house, all of it. It's not happening.

Rob, we're not no-future losers. You know those high-school kids who study hard, get great grades, have part-time jobs, and manage to excel at athletics all at the same time? That was us. The university students who go to class, make the dean's list, run extra-curricular clubs, and still make it out to the bar once in a while? We were those guys. We've got nothing against hard work and earning our way. I'd argue that we're even rather good at it. You know who gets jobs today? The CEO's kid. The CFO's niece. The VP of Marketing's next door neighbour's kid. Nepotism and cronyism are what it takes, and even that isn't always enough.

Being willing to work is absolutely USELESS if you can't get a foot in the door. The economy is only part of the problem.

All the best, and thank you again for writing what you wrote. It's about time someone said it. ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105776-A-29-year-old-on-the-difficulties-of-landing-a-first-job Manny Pacquiao: Free Speech Fight http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105775-Manny-Pacquiao-Free-Speech-Fight&goto=newpost Fri, 18 May 2012 01:17:24 GMT http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303448404577410063112857998.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion Updated May 17, 2012, 2:57 p.m. ET Free Speech Fight Could a boxer beat an intolerant shopping-center owner in court? By JAMES TARANTO Manny Pacquiao says he was... http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...DDLETopOpinion

Updated May 17, 2012, 2:57 p.m. ET

Free Speech Fight
Could a boxer beat an intolerant shopping-center owner in court?

By JAMES TARANTO

Manny Pacquiao says he was misconstrued. In an interview with Granville Ampong, a blogger for Examiner.com, the Filipino boxing star disapproved of same-sex marriage:

Pacquiao . . . believes the sweeping campaign of Obama favoring the gays and lesbians to legally marry is nothing more than a direct attack on the moral society and against the creative power and will of God.

Pacquiao continues: "God only expects man and woman to be together and to be legally married, only if they so are in love with each other."

"It should not be of the same sex so as to adulterate the altar of matrimony, like in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah of Old."

Ampong introduced Pacquiao's statement by quoting Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

In a statement quoted by Los Angeles' KTLA-TV, "Pacquiao's camp" distanced the boxer from the Old Testament passage: "Pacquiao is simply against the marriage of anyone that is not Man and Woman as he believes is stated in the Bible. 'I didn't say that, that's a lie. . . . I didn't know that quote from Leviticus because I haven't read the Book of Leviticus yet,' he said." Maybe he's reading from back to front.
[botwt0517] AFP/Getty Images

Manny Pacquiao

But here's where things get interesting. Yesterday Pacquiao gave an interview to "Extra," a syndicated entertainment news program that usually is produced at The Grove at Farmers Market, a shopping center in the Fairfax District of Los Angeles. "On Monday night," KTLA reports," a post on the Grove's Twitter account read: 'Boxer Manny Pacquiao is not welcome at @TheGroveLA. @TheGroveLA is a gathering place for all Angelenos, not a place for intolerance.' " So Pacquiao was forced to do the interview from another location.

It's a wonderful little example of the left's inverted idea of "tolerance": They'll tolerate you as long as you don't deviate from their orthodoxy. There's a political angle as well as the ideological one. The Grove is owned by a company called Caruso Affiliated, whose CEO, Rick Caruso, is a politician. He has held several appointed city posts and is an as-yet-unofficial candidate for mayor of Los Angeles (the election is in May 2013).

Los Angeles is one place where same-sex marriage is popular. According to L.A. Times figures, 57.5% of the city's voters opposed Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that wrote the traditional definition of marriage into the state constitution. (Los Angeles County voters favored Proposition 8 by less than half a percentage point, and it passed statewide with 52%.) Caruso Affiliated's censorious show of "tolerance" may be an effective political maneuver, a way of building a political base of illiberal "liberals."

But it could also be a source of legal trouble. If Pacquiao is inclined to pick a fight, he would have a strong free-speech case against Caruso Affiliated.

Not a First Amendment case, mind you. The U.S. Constitution protects free speech only against encroachment by governmental authorities. Under federal law, a private company has no obligation to permit or facilitate speech on its property.

But the California Constitution is different, as the U.S. Supreme Court acknowledged in the 1980 case of PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins . The facts are rather quaint: A group of Northern California high school students set up a card table at the shopping center's courtyard, seeking signatures on a petition opposing a U.N. resolution against Israel. "Their activity was peaceful and orderly and so far as the record indicates was not objected to by PruneYard's patrons," Justice William Rehnquist wrote for the court. But PruneYard management ejected the kids under a policy prohibiting noncommercial speech on the premises.

In most states, PruneYard would have been within its rights. But the California Supreme Court held that the state constitution protects "speech and petitioning, reasonably exercised, in shopping centers even when the centers are privately owned." Rehnquist and his colleagues affirmed this ruling, holding that it was a legitimate exercise of California's police power and rejecting PruneYard's claim that it constituted a taking of property under the Fifth Amendment.

Only a few other state high courts have interpreted their constitutions in accord with the PruneYard rule, and some have pointedly rejected it. In Shad Alliance v. Smith Haven Mall (1985), the New York Court of Appeals said PruneYard was "based on a premise we cannot accept, namely, that notwithstanding the absence of State action in some form, individuals have a constitutional right of free speech on private property merely because the owner has invited large numbers of the general public to come onto the property. That kind of reasoning has no support in the language of the New York Constitution."

But PruneYard remains good law in California, and Pacquiao would seem to have a strong case were he to challenge his banishment from The Grove on free-speech grounds. Unlike in the PruneYard case, Caruso Affiliated's action is not even predicated on the use of company property for expressive activity. The company has banned him for something he said (or is reputed to have said) elsewhere. And whereas the PruneYard plaintiffs were not targeted because of the content of their speech, Caruso Affiliated is discriminating against Pacquiao on the basis of his viewpoint--which in a free-speech case involving government action would almost certainly tip the scales in the plaintiff's favor.

But wait. Caruso Affiliated may have a defense precisely because it is engaging in viewpoint discrimination. In PruneYard, the defendant argued that imposing upon it the obligation to facilitate speech traduced its First Amendment rights. Justice Rehnquist rejected this claim on the ground that "appellants are not . . . being compelled to affirm their belief in any governmentally prescribed position or view, and they are free to publicly dissociate themselves from the views of the speakers or handbillers."

Caruso Affiliated could argue that banishing Pacquiao, so as to publicly dissociate the company from his views, is an expressive act protected by the First Amendment. If that argument prevailed, the company's rights under the federal Constitution would trump Pacquiao's rights under the California Constitution.

In making such an argument, the intolerant left would be embracing a principle that in other contexts drives it to expressions of murderous hatred: that First Amendment rights apply to corporations. That would be a bout worth watching. ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105775-Manny-Pacquiao-Free-Speech-Fight A Successful Jewish Return to Tunisia http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105774-A-Successful-Jewish-Return-to-Tunisia&goto=newpost Fri, 18 May 2012 01:08:09 GMT http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304192704577406023082159382.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEFTTopOpinion May 17, 2012, 7:14 p.m. ET A Successful Jewish Return to Tunisia The new Islamist government passes a religious freedom test. By GIL SHEFLER Djerba, Tunisia http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...LEFTTopOpinion

May 17, 2012, 7:14 p.m. ET

A Successful Jewish Return to Tunisia
The new Islamist government passes a religious freedom test.

By GIL SHEFLER

Djerba, Tunisia

Fifteen months after the "Arab Spring" was first hailed, how are we to judge progress in Tunisia, Egypt and elsewhere? The protection of minority rights is always a bellwether, so I traveled to North Africa this month to check on the annual Jewish pilgrimage to the Tunisian island of Djerba. Tunisia's new Islamist government had promised a seamless affair, but a last-minute scheduling conflict—featuring the Sunni Muslim world's leading radical televangelist—almost spelled disaster.

Jews have been living in present-day Tunisia since antiquity. Their population numbered over 100,000 during the 1940s but diminished drastically after the state of Israel's creation in 1948. Today about 1,500 remain in the country, and last year's toppling of strongman Zine El Abidine Ben Ali—who had overseen generally good relations between Muslims and Jews over his 23-year rule—put their status in question.

Further concern arose in October, when Tunisia's first free elections were swept by a previously banned Islamist party, Nahda, which promised to establish Shariah law and embolden local Salafist Muslims who openly call for the murder of Jews. But Nahda is nothing if not attuned to its international reputation—and so its officials made a priority of preserving the Jewish pilgrimage to Djerba, which had been canceled last year amid security threats.

"Celebrated for hundreds of years"—on Lag BaOmer, a Jewish holiday honoring Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, a second-century sage—"this religious rite is an achievement that should not change because it illustrates the openness of Tunisia to the world," said Tunisian Tourism Minister Elyes Fakhfakh last month. "It is an achievement of the revolution, which established freedom of worship."

But that same freedom of worship also opened the way for figures such as Youssef Qaradawi, the radical Egyptian-born cleric who spent the past 50 years becoming a powerful theologian in Qatar, outside the reach of North Africa's secular autocrats. Mr. Qaradawi, who has a long history of anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli statements, announced plans to speak in Djerba on May 5, four days before the planned Jewish pilgrimage.

Tthe first day of pilgrimage at the Ghriba synagogue in Djerba, Tunisia, on Wednesday.

"We had to do something," Roger Bismuth, a leader of the Jewish community in Tunis, told me after the fact. "If [Qaradawi] had said anything wrong it would have gone badly for the pilgrimage, and they listened to us." By that he means that Tunisian authorities relocated the cleric's gathering to the mainland. Crisis averted.

According to several leaders in the Tunisian Jewish community, there was no apparent blowback from Mr. Qaradawi and his supporters. Perhaps that's because the cleric still received a hero's welcome upon arrival at the airport in Tunis, where several high-ranking Nahda politicians were on hand to greet him affectionately.

The Jewish celebration in Djerba went ahead without a hitch on May 9. Several hundred worshipers danced with Torah scrolls in a small procession outside El Ghriba synagogue. Men played the darbuka, sang songs, and prayed inside the ancient house of worship. The gathering was surrounded at all times by a small army of policemen to ensure nothing went wrong.

"To me, there is something magical about Jews and Arabs living together like they do here," said Guy Tzinmann, a French Jew who came from Paris to take part in the event. "If you don't come with an Israeli passport, they don't give you any trouble. And unlike Algeria, where my mother is from, I can come here to visit."

To be sure, turnout could have been stronger; only a few dozen people came from overseas, a far cry from the thousands who attended over the past decade. But it's hard to see the event as anything other than a success.

Had it not been renewed after its cancellation last year, had Qaradawi stirred up trouble on the island, or had inadequate security been provided by the authorities, it would have cast a pall on the future of the Jews in Tunisia and, in turn, on the new government's commitment to human rights.

Next spring, Tunisia will again hold elections—with the winners empowered to draft a new constitution. That process will be a major indicator of whether the Arab Spring holds promise for human rights and religious liberty in the Middle East. The Djerba pilgrimage suggests that Tunisia still has promise.

Mr. Shefler is Jewish affairs correspondent for the Jerusalem Post. ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105774-A-Successful-Jewish-Return-to-Tunisia Disco queen Donna Summer dead at 63 http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105773-Disco-queen-Donna-Summer-dead-at-63&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 16:51:03 GMT RIP DONNA Image: http://img834.imageshack.us/img834/4760/donnasummer03.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/834/donnasummer03.jpg/) 5/17/12 Legendary disco singer Donna Summer died Thursday after a battle with cancer, sources close to the singer confirmed to FoxNews.com. Summer,...

RIP DONNA

5/17/12

Legendary disco singer Donna Summer died Thursday after a battle with cancer, sources close to the singer confirmed to FoxNews.com.

Summer, 63, was a 5-time Grammy winner whose hits dominated the charts in the 1970s. Her songs like “Last Dance,” “Bad Girls” and “Hot Stuff” were among the decade’s most successful.

She continued topping charts into the 1980s, with hits like “She Works Hard for the Money” and“This Time I Know It’s for Real.”

She is survived by her husband, singer and producer Bruce Sudano, their daughters, Brooklyn and Amanda and Summer's daughter, Mimi, from a previous marriage.

This is a developing story. Please click refresh for updates.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment...#ixzz1v98EqsMD

Last Dance
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKuq6...feature=fvwrel ]]> American_Jihad http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105773-Disco-queen-Donna-Summer-dead-at-63 <![CDATA[Poor Barry can't catch a break....]]> http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105772-Poor-Barry-can-t-catch-a-break....&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 11:20:29 GMT *Budget goes down in flames...* (http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/inside-politics/2012/may/16/obama-budget-defeated-99-0-senate/) *Unanimously rejected by Dem Senate...* (http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/227857-senate-rejects-obama-budget-in-99-0-vote) *Fails to get single vote... Budget goes down in flames...

Unanimously rejected by Dem Senate...

Fails to get single vote anywhere in Congress...

Even labor unions oppose... ]]> Screw Hollywood http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105772-Poor-Barry-can-t-catch-a-break.... The Soros Summit http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105771-The-Soros-Summit&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 04:57:36 GMT Image: http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/7915/georgesorosoffered25000.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/7/georgesorosoffered25000.jpg/) Fat old Pig *The Soros Summit* 5/15/12 *Free Beacon exclusive: Inside the secret Miami meeting of George Soros’s liberal conspiracy*

Fat old Pig

The Soros Summit

5/15/12

Free Beacon exclusive: Inside the secret Miami meeting of George Soros’s liberal conspiracy

A secretive network of left-wing billionaires and their political operatives descended on the luxurious Biltmore Hotel in Miami over the weekend to discuss strategy for the coming elections.

The location of the conference had been kept a closely guarded secret by the members and guests of Democracy Alliance (DA), a collection of ultra-wealthy liberal donors formed in 2005, and is reported here in a Washington Free Beacon exclusive.

Attendees roamed the grounds at the 150-acre tropical resort on their way to cocktail gatherings, salsa dance lessons, and workshops such as “Occupy the Voting Booth” and “The 1 Percent Rule.” Local police guarded entrances as members attended a “partners only” meeting in the hotel’s Country Club Courtyard.

“Name badges must be worn at all times,” attendees were informed.

A Free Beacon reporter who tried to attend the conference after-party was intercepted by Alexandra Visher, the DA’s vice president of partner engagement and communications.

“These are individuals of considerable means” who often support policies that run contrary to their own interests, Visher said, as she escorted the reporter out of the party.

Earlier, the Free Beacon reporter was approached by a plain-clothes police officer who said taking pictures of the conference-goers was prohibited. The reporter was not taking pictures at the time.

Asked for an explanation, the officer said, “I can’t talk about it.”

The conference was attended by the biggest names in liberal politics, including billionaire financier George Soros, who has already pledged at least $2 million to pro-Democratic groups this cycle.

The actual amount Soros has contributed may be much higher, according to experts.

Contrary to Visher’s claim, in the past Soros has boasted that he “made many millions” off of similar political philanthropy, “which had at first looked like a fruitless venture.”

Andy Stern, the former president of the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and frequent White House visitor, lounged by the Biltmore’s “lagoon sized pool.”

DA board member and Soros spokesman Michael Vachon swam laps.

Ari Rabin-Havt, executive vice president of Media Matters for America (MMFA), was overheard speaking to colleagues about his plans for a new MMFA fellowship, and bragging about a phone call he had received from Stephanie Cutter, deputy campaign manager for the Obama re-election team.

Soros publicly contributed $1 million to MMFA in 2010, after years of speculation that he was the group’s primary secret donor.

The Center for American Progress (CAP), a liberal think tank with deep ties to the Obama administration, was also heavily represented. CAP president Neera Tanden joined former Rep. Tom Perriello (D., Va.), president and CEO of the CAP Action Fund, and Van Jones, a senior fellow and former White House green jobs adviser, among others.

Jones did not respond to the Free Beacon’s requests for comment.

The Center for American Progress has been at the forefront of a coordinated campaign to discredit and demonize conservative donors and to demand transparency in political giving.

However, CAP does not disclose its donors, nor does it mention its participation in the Democracy Alliance on its website. Soros pledged an initial $3 million to the organization in 2003.

Perriello was overheard in between sessions talking to other attendees about President Barack Obama’s electoral prospects in Virginia.

“There’s going to be an insane amount of money on the other side, and we’ve seen what that can do in a Congressional [election]” he said, noting that a “gender gap” had opened up in Northern Virginia that may be “very helpful.”

Perriello, who represented Virginia’s Fifth Congressional District from 2009-2011, lost decisively to Republican Robert Hurt in the 2010 election.

When it comes to “insane amounts of money,” however, the Biltmore is hard to beat. Shiny black Maseratis, McLarens, and Jaguars fill the parking lots; exotic finches flutter about the lobby; and the hotel’s luxury spa offers “Antioxidant Foam Wraps” and “Moroccan Oil Scalp Massages” for a rate equivalent to $3 per minute (gratuity not included).

Inside the rooms, which cost as much as $3,000 per night, guests are invited to enjoy $8 bottles of Evian. The accompanying literature features advertisements for private Swiss banks such as E. Gutzwiller & Cie.

Controversial former Rep. Alan Grayson (D., Fla.), who nicknamed his most recent opponent and current congressman Daniel Webster (R., Fla.) “Taliban Dan,” cracked jokes in the elevators.

DA board members such as Steve Phillips, Donald Sussman, and Kelly Craighead, each with connections to major left-leaning political organizations, were less recognizable, but perhaps of equal or greater import.

Phillips, who serves as secretary for the DA, oversees a number of political action committees such as PAC+, which focuses on Latino voters, and PowerPAC.org, a “statewide social justice organization working with community organizations and activists to build political power in California.”

Sussman, a hedge-fund manager who invests in Chinese companies, is married to Rep. Chellie Pingree (D., Maine) and currently serves on the board of CAP.

Another prominent hedge fund manager, Thomas E. Steyer of Farallon Capital Management, also sits on CAP’s board.

Craighead is the DA’s president and managing director. She formerly worked as a “strategic consultant” to liberal groups like MMFA.

Other notable attendees include Cynthia Ryan, a principal at the investment firm Schooner Capital, who has bundled between $200,000 and $500,000 for Obama’s reelection campaign.

The SEIU’s Larry McNeil, identified as a long-time “Saul Alinski organizer” [sic] in one online biography, was there with his wife Anne Bartley, currently a trustee of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund and a top contributor to the EMILY’s List Women Vote! PAC.

Sandor Straus, a prominent investment manager who has given at least $115,000 to Democratic candidates and liberal organizations this cycle, and Al Yates, the former Colorado State University president who played a pivotal role in the DA’s formation, were also in attendance.

DA founder emeritus Rob Stein has described the group as a “political investment bank” whose mission is to “balance the market place of ideas and political activism with center-left ideas, messages, and organizing strategy.” Members are required to pay annual dues starting at $30,000 and contribute at least $170,000 per year to recommended groups.

The timing of the conference was significant as the organization is said to be experiencing dissent within its ranks.

“There is heavy debate over whether to fund organizations closely aligned with the Democratic Party or those that operating outside it and pressuring it to move in a more progressive direction,” the Huffington Post’s Ryan Grim recently reported.

The resignation of billionaire insurance magnate Peter Lewis, the chairman of Progressive Insurance and one of the group’s founding members, was one sign of trouble for the organization.
The DA also caused a stir when it decided to stop funding a number of groups that operated outside the explicitly partisan realm of the Democratic Party, such as Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and Third Way, a center-left think thank.

However, at least one Third Way board member, Tim Sweeney of the Denver-based Gill Foundation, was spotted at the conference in Miami.

Groups such as Media Matters and the Center for American Progress, both of which maintain extensive ties to the Obama administration, have retained their favored status within the DA.

Other liberal grassroots organizations that have not been ostracized by the DA include America Votes, the Campaign for Community Change, and Act Blue, a PAC that bills itself as “the online clearinghouse for Democratic Action.”

It is not clear whether any senior administration officials or campaign representatives spoke at the conference.

However, both Vice President Joe Biden and Bill Burton, chairman of the Obama-aligned Priorities USA Super PAC, have addressed secret Democracy Alliance summits in the past.

DA chairman and Big Taco baron Rob McKay, who also sits on the board of Priorities USA, hosted a $35,800-a-head fundraiser for Obama earlier this year.

Visher, the DA spokesperson, told the Free Beacon that the group’s members should be allowed to meet and advance their agenda in private.

She cited the New York Times’ Nicholas Confessore as a reporter whose work was appropriately respectful of the network’s privacy.

Confessore reported last week that the DA was planning to “convene near Miami,” but did not provide additional details such as the exact location of the event or notable invitees.

When contacted by the Free Beacon regarding his reasoning for not reporting such information, Confessore referred us to Eileen Murphy, the Times’ vice president of corporate communications.

“You are getting into a level of detail regarding our reporting and editing process here that we do not typically discuss publicly,” Murphy said in an email. “Sorry I won’t be able to be of much assistance.”

http://freebeacon.com/the-soros-summit/ ]]> American_Jihad http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105771-The-Soros-Summit The Obama Economy Is Wrecking NASCAR http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105770-The-Obama-Economy-Is-Wrecking-NASCAR&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 04:44:39 GMT

"The only part I like is the left turn"

The Obama Economy Is Wrecking NASCAR

May 15, 2012 • By MICHAEL WARREN

The National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing (NASCAR) has been considered America’s fastest growing sport, quickly becoming a national phenomenon. But a new economic study shows even NASCAR’s powerful engines haven’t been able to keep up with the Obama-era economy.

The study, from the pro-market think tank Public Notice and Race Fans 4 Freedom, finds that the economic downturn of the last several years has directly affected how NASCAR fans watch and enjoy their sport. Since 2009, race attendance per year has fallen below 4 million people, and the number has been declining severely as the unemployment rate has skyrocketed. The cost of attending—with higher gas prices, less disposable income, and diminished financial security—has increased.

The Obama Economy Is Wrecking NASCAR | The Weekly Standard ]]> American_Jihad http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105770-The-Obama-Economy-Is-Wrecking-NASCAR The Islamic ruling on civil weddings http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105769-The-Islamic-ruling-on-civil-weddings&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 04:06:22 GMT http://www.theislamist.net/ruling-on-civil-marriages/ Ruling on Civil Marriages Posted by Abu Muwahhid on Saturday, May 12, 2012 · Leave a Comment The Islamic ruling on civil weddings Fatwa by Sheikh Abu Bilal Al-Halabi Question: http://www.theislamist.net/ruling-on-civil-marriages/

Ruling on Civil Marriages

Posted by Abu Muwahhid on Saturday, May 12, 2012 · Leave a Comment

The Islamic ruling on civil weddings
Fatwa by Sheikh Abu Bilal Al-Halabi

Question:

What is the Islamic verdict on civil (registered) marriages? Is a Muslim allowed to marry at a registry office?

Answer:

Marriage in Islam is a divine bond between two legitimate parties to enjoy social and intimate relationship with each other and to have children. It is one of the most sacred divine contracts because the subject matter is a human being, i.e. the would-be wife. Hence, not only among the Muslims but also among the Jews and Christians, marriage is treated in a very sacred manner by imams, rabbis and priests, respectively. In Islam, marriage is part of the social system which lays down the detailed guidelines about the relationship between the opposite genders, i.e. what is the nature of their meeting together, their relationship and the consequences and/or results or outcome of such relationships.

Marriage is a recommended act in Islam and a divine rule which organises the relationship between two mature, sane parties in the absence of any divine prevention. This is due to the fact that Allah (SWT) says: “Get married from those women you like whether two or three or four and if you fear that you will deal unfairly with them then keep one or marry from those which your hand possesses,” [EMQ 4:3] and “Among His signs is this, that He created you mates from among yourselves, that you may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your hearts, verily in that are signs for those who reflect,” [EMQ 30:21]. And the Messenger Muhammad (saw) said: “Marriage is half the Deen.”

Verily, marriage is half the Deen, for it is the fundamental pillar of the social system. We set out below some of the rules surrounding the Islamic marriage.

THE DIVINE DUTIES OF THE HUSBAND

An-Nafaqah – The husband has the duty to provide food, clothing and shelter to his wife.
As-Sakan wat-Tama’neenah – The husband has the duty to observe tranquillity and security towards his wife.
Al-Ishra wal-Injaab – The husband has the duty to maintain a social and intimate relationship with his wife and not to prevent her from having children from him.

THE DIVINE DUTIES OF THE WIFE

Al-Qawaamah – The wife has the duty to accept the Qawaamah, i.e. that her husband has authority over her, the right to be obeyed and to look after him, his health and children.
As-Sakan wat-Tama’neenah – The wife has the duty to observe tranquillity and security towards her husband.
Al-Ishra wal-Injaab – The wife has the duty to maintain a social and intimate relationship with her husband and not to prevent him from having children from her.

CONDITIONS AND PILLARS OF THE NIKAH CONTRACT

The pillars of every contract, including the marriage contract, in Islam are three:

Al-’Aaqidaan (the two parties) – who must both be mature and sane, and there must be no preventions or prohibitions such as the woman being pregnant or in her waiting period from the divorce or death of her previous husband.
Seeghat ul-’Aqd – The deal, i.e. the offer (al-Eejaab) and acceptance (al-Qabool). There must be no ambiguity over what is offered and accepted between the parties. In addition, the deal must be worded by using the word ‘Nikah’ or ‘marriage’ in the past tense and the parties or their representatives must be present at the time of the contract being made.
Al-Ma’qood ‘Alayh (the subject matter) – Again the subject matter must be without any prohibitions or preventions.

The absence of any one of the aforementioned conditions (and therefore pillars) will invalidate the contract of Nikah. In addition, there are certain supplementary conditions such as the permission of the Walil Amr, i.e. the guardian of the would-be wife, two trustworthy and valid witnesses, and a specified mahr (dowry), i.e. a divine gift from the husband to his wife.

In light of the above, let us examine what civil marriages in the West, such as in the UK, are all about. Are they just about registering the Nikah contract before an authorised body or an organised institution, or is it about submitting fully to the social system in the West including the rights of the husband and wife, the conditions of the two parties for marriage, the criteria for witnesses, the rules effecting maternity and provision, inheritance matters, divorce and custody of children, and so forth.

A civil marriage is a contract registered in the local council in order for a man and woman to have a relationship governed by the marriage laws of the state. Any man can marry any woman, whether they are boyfriend or girlfriend, fornicator or “fornicatress”, pregnant or having had previous sexual relations, without reservation, except on the proviso that they have no registered marriage in existence already.

It is clearly prohibited to be involved in this procedure for Muslims from an Islamic perspective at any time. To give the civil marriage priority and to put a condition, as some Muslims unfortunately do, that any Muslim should undergo such a procedure before what is requested by God is therefore an anathema to Islam and Muslims.

The civil marriage contract is prohibited (haram) to be involved in for Muslims from an Islamic perspective for the following reasons:

In Islam the condition for the two marrying parties is that they must both be Muslim or that the woman is from the People of the Book, unlike in a civil wedding where the religion of the parties is irrelevant.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage there is no condition for there to be two witnesses present as stipulated by the Sharia – the wedding record being enough.
Contrary to Islam, there is also no condition on the man to pay Nafaqah (i.e. to provide food, clothing and shelter for the wife) in a civil marriage.
Contrary to Islam, there is no condition in a civil marriage for the man to pay or to stipulate a Mahr (dowry) to be paid.
Contrary to Islam, there is no condition in a civil marriage to obtain the permission of the Walil Amr, i.e. father, just as long as the parties are over 18.
Contrary to Islam, there is no condition in a civil marriage to complete the waiting period after a divorce from a previous husband or death of the husband or after a previous illegitimate relationship with the intended partner.
Contrary to Islam, it is permitted in civil marriages to marry a woman even if she is pregnant; which is a divine prevention in Islam.
Contrary to Islam, a civil marriage says that the maternity of children belongs solely to the mother unlike in Islam where the divine rights of the child are protected and the child stays with the divorced mother up to the age of 7 and from then onwards it will have the right of residence with the father. If the man leaves Islam, i.e. becomes an apostate, the child would stay with the mother until 7 and then go to the ex-father’s brother, but if his family are non-Muslim then the child will stay with the mother (who is Muslim). In a civil marriage these rights are ignored and any residence is invariably granted to the mother. Moreover, in Islam if both the husband and wife die the children will go to the husband’s family and the woman’s family will have visitation rights unlike in a civil marriage.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage divorce is the right of both parties which needs a court order (i.e. a second party’s consent).
Contrary to Islam, after a civil marriage a woman can inherit substantially all her husband’s wealth. Whereas in Islam the wife will take 1/6th or 1/8th in certain circumstances. The surviving husband on the other hand will take 1 /2 of her wealth and sometimes 1/4.
Contrary to Islam, a civil marriage does not permit a man to enforce sex on his wife or to discipline her.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage both parties have the right to go anywhere they want without asking the other’s permission whereas it is obligatory to ask the husband’s permission before leaving the home in Islam.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage the choice is the mother’s as to whom a child is attributed whereas it is the divine right of the father, i.e. to be attributed to him alone, in Islam.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage if the husband becomes an apostate there is no automatic divorce. The implication of this is that the wife will still inherit if the husband becomes an apostate and dies. In Islam, if a woman becomes an apostate the marriage will also be broken automatically.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage a husband does not give the wife the right to prosecute him if he does not provide provision for her. Rather she is expected to bring up the children on a minimum determined by the State whose amount is not Islamic.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage the wife cannot steal from the husband if the husband is miserly, whereas it is allowed in Islam. On the other hand if the husband steals from his wife then his hand is subject to be cut in Islam.
Contrary to Islam, adultery by the wife does not break the civil marriage contract, whereas if the woman commits adultery in Islam the contract is broken immediately. If the man commits adultery on the other hand it is up to the woman whether she wishes to obtain a Khula’ (i.e. to break the contract or not).
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage a child will stay with the mother even if she becomes an apostate.
Contrary to Islam, in a civil marriage one can have a judicial separation agreement.

The fact of the matter is that the civil marriage is a complete non-Islamic social system and man-made way of life which contradicts the Islamic marriage and way of life in all its details, such as the penal code, the right of the husband to discipline his wife, the right of the wife to divorce herself in certain circumstances, the right of the husband to divorce his wife instantly including the observation of the waiting period for the wife, and so forth.

Verily, registration will give the kufr social system related to divorce, maternity, etc. the upper hand over the Islamic social system and way of life, and Islam forbids this explicitly, for Allah (SWT) says:

“Allah forbids the believers to give the disbelievers an upper hand over them.” [EMQ 4:141]

In addition, Allah orders us to refer to the Qur’an and Sunnah in any dispute amongst ourselves, for Allah (SWT) says: “When you differ in any matter refer to Allah and His Messenger,” [EMQ 4:59]. Moreover, the Muslims are supposed to judge by whatever Allah (SWT) has revealed and not by whatever the law of the land has legislated, for Allah (SWT) says:

“Rule and judge by whatever Allah (SWT) has revealed and do not follow their whims and desires lest they take you away from what has been revealed.” [EMQ 5:49]

Furthermore, Allah (SWT) has clearly commanded us to obey Him and His Messenger with full submission and without any choice, for Allah (SWT) says:

“It is not allowed for the believers male or female to have any option in a matter when it has been decided by Allah (SWT) and His Messenger.” [EMQ 33:36]

We call upon all Muslims to refrain from marrying in accordance with civil law. Any marriage based upon this law is considered to be invalid in Islam. Any children from such a marriage would also be considered illegitimate in Islam and such a situation would therefore require Islamic recovery procedures to be put in place immediately. ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105769-The-Islamic-ruling-on-civil-weddings Black-on-White Crime and the Reasons for a Media Double-Standard http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105768-Black-on-White-Crime-and-the-Reasons-for-a-Media-Double-Standard&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 04:05:52 GMT http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-ce...b_1521775.html

Bob Cesca

Host of The Bob & Chez Show, Media Producer
GET UPDATES FROM Bob Cesca

Like
1k
Black-on-White Crime and the Reasons for a Media Double-Standard
Posted: 05/16/2012 3:23 pm

Last week, my friend and podcast partner Chez Pazienza wrote a piece about a case involving several African American youths in Norfolk, Virginia who allegedly beat up a pair of reporters from the Virginian-Pilot newspaper, Dave Forster and Marjon Rostami. Forster happens to be white and Rostami is Iranian. I hastened to mention the races of everyone involved because it applies to the rest of the story. The incident went largely unnoticed in the press, mainly because the the Virginian-Pilot only published news of the incident in the form of a opinion piece written by Michelle Washington two weeks later. There's another reason it wasn't covered by the Pilot, and I'll get to that shortly.

Washington's opinion piece reached Matt Drudge's yellow-journalism desk and BLAM! Drudge posted a link to the op/ed with the predictably misleading headline: "100 Black Teens Beat White Couple in Norfolk... Media Bury Attack."

Every angry right-winger looking for an excuse for their ridiculous false equivalences about white racism versus "black racism" had a brand new hobby horse to ride. On Fox News Channel, Bill O'Reilly issued one of his personal jihads against the Virginian-Pilot, sending his creepy stalking danger-boy, Jesse Watters, to Virginia to accost the editor of the paper, Denis Finley, and find out why he was obviously helping to oppress the white majority. Why would the newspaper wait for so long before publishing the story? Why won't this newspaper get its boot off the neck of white people?! Why does the news media hate white people?! I'm paraphrasing, of course. But that was the subtext of O'Reilly's segments.

During one segment, O'Reilly and contributor Bernard Goldberg, in a fantastically propagandized illustration of the wealthy white majority playing the oppressed victim, lamented what they considered to be a journalistic "double-standard." The Trayvon Martin case, a white-on-black crime, received and continues to receive ample media attention while the reportedly black-on-white Forster/Rostami case was only given an initial opinion page write-up two weeks later (there have since been numerous stories about the assault).

Chez defended Bill O'Reilly and Fox News Channel for saying that there's a double-standard at play: on one hand the press and, specifically, cable news continues to be outraged by the Trayvon Martin case, while, on the other hand, the Virginian-Pilot case didn't receive any attention at all, thus ignoring a black-on-white crime and illustrating some sort of double-standard epidemic. (I should note here that this column isn't necessarily a refutation of Chez's piece. Consider this another point of view on double-standards.)

In a way, both O'Reilly and Chez are correct. In a way. There's absolutely a double-standard because the crimes -- the Trayvon Martin case and the Forster/Rostami case -- are vastly different in almost every way and should, therefore, be treated with vastly different coverage. They're different in terms of outcome, they're different in terms of details and each have very different historical and contemporaneous contexts.

The truth is, not every white-on-black crime is given Trayvon Martin-level coverage. Not by a long shot. So why was there so much outrage swirling around Trayvon?

Let's do the list.

First, Trayvon was a kid walking through a white neighborhood armed with nothing but snacks. Second, Trayvon was shot and killed. Third, and most suspiciously, law enforcement released George Zimmerman without charging him with any crimes, and Zimmerman was allowed to keep his firearm. Fourth, there's a sinister gun violence meets gun control meets NRA component here. Fifth, there appeared to be details that the Sanford police were withholding from the public, making it seem like yet another example of whites covering-up a white-on-black crime. Sixth, there's evidence of racial profiling by Zimmerman. And finally, and most importantly, the historical context is far more complicated when it comes to white-on-black crime, as well as the white presumption of African American guilt when the racial roles are reversed. More on that presently.

Meanwhile in Virginia, even though the attack was clearly traumatic for Foster and Rostami, they weren't hospitalized nor did they receive medical treatment for their minor injuries. There's no evidence of racial profiling -- in other words, there's no evidence that the attack was racially motivated and it probably wouldn't have happened at all if Forster hadn't jumped out of his car to confront the youths. Even though a rock hit Forster's car window, the window doesn't appear to have been shattered. And the police have already arrested a kid for throwing the rock, while there are warrants out for another assailant. Again, while traumatic, it's a far cry from the ugliness and inexplicable mysteries of the Trayvon case. No potential cover-ups. No fatalities. No serious injuries. The initial characterization by Michelle Washington and Drudge that "hundreds" of black teens wantonly beat a white couple (only "a handful" were involved), hospitalizing them, while their car was trashed appears to be highly exaggerated because, if true, the injuries wouldn't be nearly as minor and, as it turns out, the reporters drove their own vehicle home that night and voluntarily declined to be named in a news story. Police chief Sharon Chamberlin said, "This is a situation where you had a whole bunch of [movie theater] events let out all at once, you had a lot of people on the street, you had an assault occur and that was isolated with a small number of people." So another major question here: is this even newsworthy? Perhaps it would be in a small town police-scanner rag, but Norfolk is not a small town.

Chez wrote: "O'Reilly may be a pompous buffoon, but I dare anyone to challenge his assertion that were the races reversed in the case in Virginia -- had it been a group of white people who attacked an African-American man and woman in their car -- it would've been the lead on Al Sharpton's MSNBC show every night since the day it happened."

Given the details and the minor "simple assault" nature of the fracas, and contrary to what Chez wrote in support of O'Reilly, it's questionable whether Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson would care about it at all. It's a relatively nothing case, especially contrasted against the gory details of the Trayvon Martin shooting.

So to compare the Forster/Rostami case with the Trayvon Martin case is a glaringly false equivalence and two different standards of judgment have to be applied.

But let's say, yes, if the incident in Norfolk had been more serious, maybe with a fatality, and let's say the races had been reversed -- a group of whites fatally attacking an African American couple -- the coverage would probably have been appropriately huge. And here's why. In addition to the hypothetically fatal crime itself, there's a considerably wicked history in America of white racism, oppression and violence against black people, which, to an extent, continues today. It's the historical and contemporaneous context that ultimately changes how these stories are, and should be, covered.

Black people are thirteen percent of the American population -- therefore members of the minority race beating up two members of the majority race is quite different in a societal sense than a member of the majority race shooting the minority race in apparent cold blood. White-on-black crime comes from a position of power. The opposite -- the minority oppressing the majority -- is impossible.

Beyond the demographics, and beyond the oppression, or even the stripping of cultural identity and the enslavement of African Americans prior to the Civil War, the last 150 years have witnessed countless examples of black people being villainized, oppressed, lynched, tortured and segregated by white people. Even after the slaves were freed, the effort to reconstruct the nation led to the North and South agreeing upon a common enemy to blame for the war and the subsequent hardships it caused: black people became a national scapegoat as society embraced the Lost Cause Mythology and the absolution of the South for seceding. Black people, they said, were responsible for 600,000 dead Americans; black people nearly destroyed the nation; black people began to seek power over white people, so they had to be held down and persecuted. They were portrayed in pop culture -- silent films, minstrel shows and cartoons -- as lazy, shiftless rapists. Soon, neo-slavery cropped up in the south, whereby black people could be arrested for nonsense crimes like "vagrancy" -- being unemployed, basically -- then disappeared and sold into secret chain gangs dotting the countryside where they would live out their lives without trial or connection to their families. Jim Crow laws, prevalent into the 1960s, and even modern purges of voter registration lists in Florida and elsewhere have disenfranchised black people and relegated them to second class citizens. Harassment, lynchings and beatings from mobs of white people in white hoods forced black people to live in fear and inferiority. Law enforcement and the judicial system was stacked against black people, and when this system wasn't selling black people into neo-slavery, it was sending large numbers of black people to prison and the electric chair. Even today, the Republican Party engages in Southern Strategy politics -- demonizing black people in order to motivate angry white voters, not unlike what Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly and others often do to pump up their ratings.

Additionally, when corporations, industry and jobs bugged out of the cities for the suburbs, and, eventually, for cheap labor overseas, corporate abandonment left our urban centers stranded and without anywhere to turn for legitimate work. City housing and education crumbled, money was scarce and, regardless of the ethnic group, drugs and gangs began to spring up out of a sense of despair and desperation. And, once again, urban black people were immediately blamed for the crime and the blight indicative of joblessness and desperation, even though it was the loss of jobs and industry that poisoned American cities. Now, with the exception of some efforts at gentrification, cities remain in constant turmoil which has only been exacerbated by the financial crisis. By the way, white conservatives have tried to blame black people for the recession, too -- all of those easy mortgages handed out like candy and squandered by black people who couldn't afford the payments.

These injustices are the context for the activist-perception and reporting of crimes like the Trayvon Martin killing and it only just begins to explain why there was such outrage generated around those proceedings. The Trayvon shooting and the handling of the case by law enforcement smelled all too familiar, and the past must not be repeated here. And so a line was drawn in the sand by activists and media personalities. Not again. Not now.

To be clear, none of these historical realities exculpates the crimes committed in Norfolk or Sanford or wherever. A crime is a crime and the people responsible for attacking Forster and Rostami should be arrested and charged (one person is already in custody). But this exhaustively lengthy context begins to explain why the crimes occur and how/why they're covered. If the press is a little tentative about covering black-on-white crime, especially when it's a minor non-fatal assault like the Forster/Rostami case, we can begin to understand why with the proper background. We can also understand, given all of these reasons, why a white-on-black crime might harken back to any of the countless atrocities committed against blacks by the white-dominated American power structure and, subsequently, we can also understand why African American activists like Al Sharpton and others are outraged when it happens. It makes complete sense given the prologue of the past.

Yes, there's a double-standard. And until there's full equality and the long slow process of racial healing is completed, the double-standard has to remain.

As for the media allegedly ignoring what appear to be black-on-white crimes, ask anyone associated with the coverage of the O.J. Simpson case if that's true.

UPDATE: Two points to clarify based on the comments. One, I'm not comparing the Trayvon case with the Norfolk case -- I'm disproving the comparison made by Bill O'Reilly and Fox News Channel. Two, if you notice at the very end, I referenced the OJ case indicating that there might not actually be a double-standard, given the unprecedented attention a black-on-white crime received in the press -- attention far exceeding the white-on-black Trayvon coverage. Three, for the benefit of the numerous commenters who don't read before commenting, I'll repeat a line I wrote above: "To be clear, none of these historical realities exculpates the crimes committed in Norfolk or Sanford or wherever. A crime is a crime and the people responsible for attacking Forster and Rostami should be arrested and charged (one person is already in custody)."

Crossposted at The Daily Banter.
Subscribe to the uncensored and totally raw Bob & Chez Show After Party podcast.
Click here to listen to the Bubble Genius Bob & Chez Show podcast, with Bob Cesca and Chez Pazienza.
Bob Cesca's Awesome Blog! Go!

Follow Bob Cesca on Twitter: www.twitter.com/bobcesca_go ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105768-Black-on-White-Crime-and-the-Reasons-for-a-Media-Double-Standard <![CDATA[Swedish Mosques' advice: 'don't report abusive husbands']]> http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105767-Swedish-Mosques-advice-don-t-report-abusive-husbands&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 04:04:57 GMT http://www.thelocal.se/40866/20120516/

Mosques' advice: 'don't report abusive husbands'

Published: 16 May 12 10:06 CET | Double click on a word to get a translation
Share97

Six out of ten mosques in Sweden gave women advice about how to deal with spousal abuse and polygamy that contradicted Swedish law, a media investigation has revealed.

Using hidden cameras and telephone recording equipment, two women posing as abused spouses visited ten of Sweden's largest mosques as part of a report put together by Sveriges Television (SVT) investigative news programme "Uppdrag granskning".

The women then asked leaders at the mosques for advice about how to address issues such as polygamy, assault and non-consensual sex.

Six out of the ten mosques visited by the women, who had also claimed that their husbands had multiple wives, told them that they should nevertheless agree to have sex with their husbands even if they didn't want to.

Six of the mosques also advised the women against reporting spousal abuse to the police. Leaders at another mosque were divided on the issue, while women received vague advice from yet another mosque.

Only two of the mosques gave the women clear advice directing them to report their abusive husbands to police.

The women were also told by nine of the ten mosques that men had the right – under certain circumstances – to have more than one wife.

Only one mosque told the women that men didn't have the right to be married to several women at the same time and that their husbands needed to follow Swedish law.

The advice, which in many cases advocated violating Swedish laws, came from imams or family counselors at the mosques.

When "Uppdrag granskning" host Janne Josefsson approached two of the largest mosques featured in the programme to inquire about their official position on matters discussed by the women, the answers he received were totally different than what the women heard.

The chair of the Islamic Association in Uppsala claimed in the story that people should follow Swedish law.

When confronted by what the imam at the Uppsala mosque told the women, the Islamic leader explained that the imam had expressed his personal opinion in urging the women to forgive their abusive husbands rather than report them to police.

The imam with whom the woman met at the mosque in Stockholm defended polygamy and also advised against filing a police report about husbands who beat them.

He suggested instead that the women try to show their husbands more love.

"Don't refuse to give him love, because then he might change," said the imam.

Upon seeing the SVT report, however, the board of the Islamic Association in Stockholm (Islamiska förbundet Stockholm) decided to suspend the imam immediately and launch an internal investigation.

"This is a clear breach of Swedish law and they commit professional misconduct in their capacities as imams and associations," Mohammad Fazlhashemi, a professor and author of books on Muslim intellectual history, told the TT news agency.

Fazlhashemi, who also appears in the SVT report, has reviewed a written transcript of the advice given to the women.

"What these men are saying to the woman violates their human rights. The men demean and insult the women when they say 'you need to tolerate that these men hit you'," said Fazlhashemi.

He is highly critical of the imams featured in the SVT report for not following Swedish law.

"Considering the fact that the mosques have received state funding, they have also committed to following Swedish law and the basic principles of democracy," he said.

Fazlhashemi describes the Muslim leaders featured in the piece as "conservative, letter of the law traditionalists".

"Now it's time for some housecleaning. They need to weed out the bad seeds," he said.

Fazlhashemi, who is also a Muslim, expressed concerns that such outdated mosque representatives benefit Muslim-haters and the far-right Sweden Democrats.

"They confirm the negative picture of Muslims. It's a real shame that they confirm of the prejudices that Islamophobes have," he said.

TT/The Local/dl
Follow The Local on Twitter

(news@thelocal.se) ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105767-Swedish-Mosques-advice-don-t-report-abusive-husbands The End of the Rainbow Dream http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105766-The-End-of-the-Rainbow-Dream&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 02:13:18 GMT http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2012/05/end-of-rainbow-dream.html#more Wednesday, May 16, 2012 The End of the Rainbow Dream Cultural Enrichment News One would expect the presence of large numbers of Muslims in Western European cities to strain the traditional alliance between gays and the... http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/20...ream.html#more

Wednesday, May 16, 2012
The End of the Rainbow Dream
Cultural Enrichment News

One would expect the presence of large numbers of Muslims in Western European cities to strain the traditional alliance between gays and the Left-Multicultural political establishment. Muslims, after all, make no secret about the fact that their religious law commands them to persecute — and even execute — homosexuals.

But the force of denial is strong. Up until recently there were few cracks in the Rainbow-Multicultural façade. Now things seem to be changing: homosexuals are fleeing their traditional neighborhoods in Hamburg, and are speaking up openly about what is happening.

Many thanks to JLH for translating this article from Die Welt, via SOS-Österreich:

A Multi-Culti Dream Shatters — Gays Flee Hamburg

May 14, 2012 (from WeltOnline, May 12)
by der Patriot

HAMBURG — The colorful, multiculti world in quarter St. Georg has developed fissures. Gays feel threatened by Muslims. Attacks and vulgar remarks by Muslims are directed at gays. Ahmet Yazici: “Homosexuality is a sin in Islam.”

Gays and Muslims are no longer fond of each other.* Again and again recently, there are reports of attacks and vulgar comments by Muslims against gays. Ahmet Yazici, vice chair of the Islamic community in north Germany, rejects the blanket condemnation of the Muslims in the quarter: “Homosexuality is a sin in Islam, but that would never be a legitimate reason to use violence,” says the 42 year-old. In the quarter behind the main railroad station are 13 mosques and prayer rooms. At the same time, it is the center of the homosexual scene in Hamburg.

In Formerly Gay Stores There Are Now Anatolian Tea Rooms

Previously, people would dress as was typical for the scene here, says a gay restaurateur who wishes to remain anonymous. “Now, you pull on sweatpants over it.” And if a hand-holding homosexual couple encounters several youths at night, it is best to cross to the other side of the street. “With the strong influx of Muslims, the golden days are over for the gays,” says the 49-year-old. Now, in once-gay stores, there are Anatolian tea rooms, Turkish bakeries, or mosques. Referring to the tense relationship, a gay asks in the magazine Hinnerk: “Would St. Georg be more fab without the kebab?”

The GAL [Grüne-Alternative Liste = Green, Alternative List] politician, Farid Müller, observes developments with concern. Some time ago, independently of each other, six men reported to the declared gay that they had been assaulted. They had not dared to go to the police. The reasons: inhibitions about coming out to the police and fear of reprisals.

The restaurateur who has lived in the quarter since 1978 confirms this fear of reporting assaults. There are insults and intimidations. Cars that bear the rainbow sticker — the symbol of gays and lesbians — have their windows smashed in antennas broken off. In December 2006 the sign for a counseling service for homosexuals was painted over with “Death to Gays.”

Ahmet Yazici of the Centrums Mosque, on the other hand, knows of no attacks. “That there are a couple of teenagers who say stupid things and act up — that happens everywhere,” he says. Tolerance is an active part of Muslim life. “We face up to the subject of homosexuality, even though it is taboo in most communities.”

(All of these developments were described by the Islamophobe Udo Ulfkotte more than five years ago in his book, SOS, The West)

* The writer uses of an old expression — “to be green” = “to be fond of.” And no doubt enjoys the pun on the name of the prominent leftist party, the Greens.

For a complete listing of previous enrichment news, see The Cultural Enrichment Archives.
Posted by Baron Bodissey at 5/16/2012 09:07:00 PM ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105766-The-End-of-the-Rainbow-Dream Teleportation record heralds secure global network http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105765-Teleportation-record-heralds-secure-global-network&goto=newpost Thu, 17 May 2012 02:12:40 GMT http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21811-teleportation-record-heralds-secure-global-network.html Teleportation record heralds secure global network 17:14 15 May 2012 by Michael Slezak The distance record for quantum teleportationMovie Camera has been smashed. Juan Yin and colleagues... http://www.newscientist.com/article/...l-network.html

Teleportation record heralds secure global network

17:14 15 May 2012 by Michael Slezak

The distance record for quantum teleportationMovie Camera has been smashed. Juan Yin and colleagues at the University of Science and Technology of China in Hefei, Anhui, teleported a quantum state 97 kilometres, 81 km further than the previous record.

Yin's team entangle photons – which links their properties even when the photons are separated. Then they beam one photon from each entangled pair to a point A and the other to B.

When a photon is changed at A, the particle at B also changes. No information passes from A to B, but the photon change can be used to partially encode quantum bits, called qubits. Rather like a letter that can't be opened, these can only be reconstructed at B using additional data communicated conventionally from point A, so information is not being sent faster than light.
Speed needed

Teleportation is ultra-secure as there are no photons travelling through space to intercept. The next step would be to teleport with a satellite, for global teleportation, says team member Yuao Chen. That might even lead to a quantum internet.

"This is a very nice piece of work," says Michael Biercuk of the Centre for Engineered Quantum Systems at the University of Sydney, who was not involved in the work.

He adds that one of the next big challenges is to increase the number of qubits processed each minute. Yin's team was able to teleport about five qubits every minute. "If long-distance teleportation is to be exploited in a useful quantum-communication or computing application, the rate of quantum-state transfer will likely need to increase substantially," says Biercuk.

Journal reference: arxiv.org/abs/1205.2024 ]]> purple unicorn http://wincoast.com/forum/showthread.php?105765-Teleportation-record-heralds-secure-global-network