So Much For The 1st Amendment! ... J. D. Longstreet

So Much For The 1st Amendment!
Feds To Determine Definition of Journalist
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*****************
"A long life in journalism convinced me many presidents ago that there should be a large air space between a journalist and the head of a state." ... Walter Lippmann
*****************
I was a member of "the press" for a number of decades.  I carried press credentials in my wallet at all times. Even after retirement I carried that press card for many years, reluctant to part with it. Once a "news hound" always a news hound as the expression goes.  (If you have not heard THAT one, you were never a reporter.)

Even in retirement, it was many, MANY,  years before I could comfortably allow a flashing red or blue light, or the sound of a wailing siren, pass me by without acquiescing to the overwhelming urge to grab the closest form of transportation and give chase like a bat from the lower climes. 

Even today, some thirty years after I hung up my pencil and pad, my recorder, my

microphone, I still get a jolt of adrenalin at the sight and sound of emergency vehicles racing toward the scene of human catastrophe and misery.

As I write these few lines, a police scanner sits flashing and alternately burping out -- or spewing out -- info from the various first responders from the sparkling Atlantic ocean -- to my east -- to the picturesque rolling hills of the piedmont -- to my west.

My inbox is filled, most all the time, with breaking news from uncounted news sources, based all over the globe,  and available on the Internet.

In retirement, I chose to spend my time commenting on current events and politics.  It is something I did as a part of my "job" when I was "active" as a reporter, or a journalist. 

Yes, I have a blog (INSIGHT on Freedom at:  http://www.insightonfreedom.blogspot.com/) But, I don't particularly consider myself a "blogger" so much as a "commentator" who happens to have a blog.

Each day, in the wee hours, I post -- and I send by e-mail -- my latest rant, or commentary, to multiple news and commentary sites on the web and to private subscribers who have asked to receive it.

So.  Am I a journalist?  I have a journal ... a blog.  Was I a journalist back when folks actually PAID me for doing what I did/do?

What's the difference between what I, and thousands of others, do today and what Thomas Paine and Samuel Adams did back in the 1700's? 

... And why the dickens am I even asking?

As you might have suspected, it's the federal government ... again!

The claim, up front, anyway, is that this is the government's way of defining who, exactly, IS a journalist and who, exactly, IS NOT a journalist.

We see it a tad differently, however. From our perspective, they (the government) detects a chink through which they believe they can curb the press in America and bring it to heel -- and in doing so -- virtually crush the 1st Amendment.

It's called a "Shield Law."  And, in our estimation it is extremely dangerous to a free press.  A free press is absolutely necessary for the survival of this constitutional, representative, republic.   I am convinced a federal shield law would endanger a free press in America.

Consider this: "On its face, the proposed shield law doesn’t affect the First Amendment, which at any rate doesn’t guarantee anybody’s right to publish whatever they want. The bill simply adds extra protections against being forced to testify about sources for established reporters and freelancers with a “considerable” amount of publishing experience. It also allows a judge to make a declaration as to who’s a journalist and who’s not in an attempt to build the shield as wide as possible."  SOURCE:  http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/2013/0914/Drudge-hates-new-shield-bill-but-is-defining-journalist-really-fascist

Here in North Carolina,we already have a press shield law, thank you very much. North Carolina's "reporter's privilege" or "shield law" is codified at N.C. Gen. Stat. § 8-53.11. 

Under NC law a journalist is defined as: 

(1) Journalist. - Any person, company, or entity, or the employees, independent contractors, or agents of that person, company, or entity, engaged in the business of gathering, compiling, writing, editing, photographing, recording, or processing information for dissemination via any news medium. - SOURCE: http://www.rcfp.org/north-carolina-privilege-compendium/shield-law-statute#sthash.TU2rPAlX.dpuf 
   
"The shield law became effective October 1, 1999, and applies only to information or documents prepared while acting as a journalist on or after that date.

In summary, the shield law grants journalists a broad but qualified privilege against disclosure of newsgathering information. The protection extends to virtually everyone connected with the publication or distribution of news information, including, but not limited to, reporters, photographers, stringers, and freelance reporters. All newsgathering activity is protected, so long as the activity is related to the business of publication or distribution of news via print, broadcast, or other electronic means. In addition, the statute protects all newsgathering information, regardless of whether the information is confidential or non-confidential. Finally, the protection extends to all legal proceedings, including criminal, civil, grand jury and quasi-judicial (i.e., administrative) proceedings."  SOURCE: http://www.rcfp.org/north-carolina-privilege-compendium/shield-law-statute#sthash.TU2rPAlX.dpuf
     
So what's wrong with having a federally codified definition of who, exactly, is a journalist? (I mean, of course, other than the troubling fact that once there is a federal definition of journalist, most states with shield laws will move to change their individual state laws to align with the federal code.)

Think about it for a moment.

The first amendment says the government cannot abridge the freedom of the press.  BUT -- if the government defines who IS a journalist -- and who ISN'T -- then they have just abridged that freedom.

In an article entitled:  "Don’t let the government define who’s a journalist,"  Mark B. Evans, writing for http://tucsoncitizen.com  says the following:  "The First Amendment says the Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of the press. But if the government defines who’s a journalist, all those outside that definition are having their free press rights abridged." SOURCE: http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/865  

See the problem?

Mr. Evans goes on to say: "Democracy requires a free press. A bill – no matter how valuable to news gathering – that opens the door to the government defining who gets to be a journalist is a bill that appears to protect a free press but in fact endangers it."  SOURCE:  http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/865

In his excellent article Mr. Evans explains:  " ... If journalists give in to government definition of journalist in order get the federal shield law they’ve long sought, they may soon get government regulation of the press they never thought possible."  SOURCE:  http://tucsoncitizen.com/mark-evans/archives/865
 
And what of Bloggers?  Want to bet which side of the definition of "journalist" bloggers will be assigned by a new federal shield law? 

Pardon my paranoia, but this shield law business doesn't pass the smell test.  I am convinced it is contrived (as so much is these days) by the government as a means to by-pass the 1st Amendment and effectively gag conservative bloggers who have proven to be thorns in the side of big Marxist government in the US.

I expect such a law will pass the democrat controlled US Senate.  It has a much less chance of survival in the US House of Representatives where the people still have SOME say in their government. 

I will, however, be contacting my Representative and insisting that he vote against any such bill should it reach the House floor for a vote.

© J. D. Longstreet

Read More

What Is This "Honor" Stuff, Anyway? ... J. D. Longstreet

What Is This "Honor" Stuff, Anyway?
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*******************************

"Honor is simply the morality of superior men."   ... H. L. Mencken.

"National honor is the national property of the highest value." ... James Monroe

*****************

Honor was a big thing in my family.  Many were the times my father lectured me on family honor, on "reputation," and maintaining a "good name."  He often explained to me that when all the extraneous stuff is finally boiled away, all a man really owns is his "good name." 

I am sorely afraid we Americans, as a people, have forgotten the importance of honor.  In fact, I sometimes feel we have lost our connection to honor, somehow, and we don't even understand the concept of principled uprightness of character and personal integrity. 

We southerners seem to no longer have a connection to our oft-touted "Code of Honor."  When we refer to the Field of Honor these  days folks automatically think of an athletic field rather than a remote area reserved for a contest of honor, a duel, to defend one's honor, or the honor of a maiden fair, or something equally as important.

The Southern Code of Honor was a code of integrity, dignity, and pride, chiefly among men -- but -- it most assuredly applied to our women folk, as well.

The North had its code of honor, as well  -- "the Northern code of honor was very much like that of Victorian England: a standard predicated on civility, piety, morality, Stoicism, and hard work."  Source:  http://www.artofmanliness.com/2012/11/12/manly-honor-part-iv-the-gentlemen-and-the-roughs-the-stoic-christian-code-of-honor-in-the-american-north/

True to the multiple differences that divided the northern and southern cultures, however, there was a HUGE difference.  The northern code allowed for a man to walk away from a fight with his honor undented, while just the opposite was true for the southerner.  As we shall see, once challenged, for a southerner to walk away from a fight, a duel, was for more damaging to him, his reputation, and that of his family, than showing up for the duel and getting himself killed.  Having a family member killed in a duel was a badge of honor for some southern families.

During the early days of the War for Southern Independence, a moderately sized town just twenty miles, or so,  from my hometown was forced to establish what were then known as "Honor Courts," in which disputes between two men -- about to duel to the death -- were tried. Both parties swore to abide by the Court's ruling.  The town's crop of young men was dangerously close to being wiped-out by the combination of the war and duels.     

To understand the importance of honor amongst the southern gentry, one must understand southern society. 

Southern aristocracy was about one notch below European nobility.  Some would argue it was certainly the equal of European aristocracy.

There was very little cash money circulating within the southern plantation system.  Monetary worth was based on ownership of land, on crops, cattle, and yes, slaves. Financing such huge operations often relied upon the barter system.

Contracts were often sealed with  a promise (a man's word) and a handshake.  THAT was considered sacred.  That promise, a man's word, and that all important handshake, crossed all societal lines in the south. It was a measure of a man's honor, his good name, how well he kept his word.  Southern culture was, indeed, a culture of honor. 

A southern gentleman exuded courtesy.   Status, courage, family, and the all important relationship between shame and pride were all integral parts of the formula for the character of a true southern gentleman.

And there was something else, something we have way too little of today.  It was something called "R E S P E C T."  Respect is a form, a way, if you will, of demonstrating one's honor for someone, some thing, or some entity, idea, or what not.  Among men, respect is earned and not easily -- or carelessly -- given.  It has often been said that to gain respect one must give respect.
Lest you think the southern code of honor is a myth, consider this:  "Laboratory research has demonstrated that men in honor cultures perceive interpersonal threats more readily than do men in other cultures, including increases in cortisol and testosterone levels following insults."  SOURCE:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_honor_%28Southern_United_States%29   

A true Southern Gentleman would never insult a woman.  He was/is always careful to be chivalrous towards women, in words and deeds.  Insulting a lady in the presence of a Southern Gentleman has been known to bring violent retribution down on the heads of the offending low-life.   Those who understand the southern culture of honor understand that the kind, courteous, respectful gentleman can, in the twinkling of an eye, bring down retributive violence -- with great alacrity -- and -- without notice.  He is ALWAYS prepared to resort to violence if, and when, the situation requires it.  

Now, gentle reader, all the above is from the perspective of a born and bred, very proud, southern male ... namely -- me.

C. S. Lewis once said:  "We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst." (The Abolition of Man)   How apropos for twenty-first century America!


I broach the subject of honor to remind us all that there is such a thing as national honor, too.

I have often thought that courage and honor are forever linked to one another.  That would apply to national courage and honor as well as to that of individuals.

 Aristotle  said:  "You will never do anything in this world without courage. It is the greatest quality of the mind NEXT TO HONOR."

The state motto of the state of North Carolina is:  "To be, rather than to seem."  I have often wondered if that motto was based upon one of Socrates' pearls of wisdom -- namely -- this one: "The greatest way to live with HONOR in this world is to be what we pretend to be."

It pains me to acknowledge that America's national honor has been badly besmirched in the last few days by the actions -- and inactions -- of the one man responsible for protecting that honor.  

It is our contention, President Obama should offer his resignation and step down from office.  In doing so he would preserve SOME of the respect his fellow Americans had for him prior to the Syrian/Russia debacle. 

Doug Patton, in an article published at Canada Free Press entitled:  "The Most Embarrassing President of My Lifetime" says the following:  "Obama is a symbol of much of today’s generation, which accepts no responsibility for anything. Therefore, when something goes wrong among his cockamamie plans, it must be someone else’s fault. Usually, of course, it would be George Bush’s fault, but even Obama couldn’t bring himself to tell that one again, not in this case. No, this time it’s the whole world’s fault. And Congress. And America. It’s American credibility that will suffer, he told the world, not his. Unbelievable."  SOURCE:  http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/57727

Mr. Patton is spot-on!  Mr. Obama demonstrates ZERO knowledge of honor, personal and/or national honor.

Friedrich Schiller reminded us all that: "That nation is worthless which does not joyfully stake everything on her honor." 

America's debasement in the eyes of the world is a stinging insult, a back-handed rebuke to every citizen of America. 

Honor demands Mr. Obama step down.

© J. D. Longstreet

Read More

We Warned Putin Would Outsmart Obama ... J. D. Longstreet

We Warned Putin Would Outsmart Obama
Revisiting "Russia's Syrian Trap For Obama" (July 2012)
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
**************
It's not that we conservative commentators are smarter than anyone else, because we most certainly are not. It is, I suppose, because we pay closer attention to current events, especially political current events, that we sometimes see/sense future events before they happen. 

Sending a tenderfoot President like Obama into the "lion's den of world politics" was a REALLY dumb idea.  He was sure to be eaten alive.  And he has been.  His name spoken around the globe illicts snickers from all quarters.  THIS is the naive Socialist/Marxist, with the golden tonsils, America elected -- then reelected -- so they could feel good about themselves -- and - vanquishing racism on their shores. (I say "they" because I didn't vote for the man either time.)   The realty is that we don't feel a darned bit better about ourselves than we did before Election Day 2008 and racism in America, well, racism is even worse than  it was before Obama was elected President.

A badly informed, youthful, electorate did not have the depth of knowledge or perception needed to understand that there is a world out there, beyond the oceans on either side of us, that doesn't give a wit about what makes us feel good.  See, those folk live in the REAL world where survival -- just trying to survive from day to day -- is, indeed,  very real.

And -- there is this: Any one elected to be President of the US MUST be qualified to handle both domestic and foreign problems.  In Obama, we got a man who has proven unable to handle either.

Obama may have been an adequate community organizer, but dear reader, America is NOT a community.  Thinking of America that way is a Marxist/collectivist perception. It is NOT real. Trying to deal with America and the world as communities has proven to be disastrous.

One does not have to be a genius to foretell where Obama is going and what he is going to do, or how he will react to certain stimuli.  He simply is NOT that complicated.  What he is -- is a narcissistic Marxist and they are among the most predictable people on earth.

Based on our experience, we told you -- over a year ago -- (July 2012) -- that this Syrian trap was going to snare Obama.   It was clear that with his narcissism, his naivete, his arrogance, he was setting himself up to be eaten alive by Putin.  Mr. Putin, complete with his Cheshire cat smile, simply lay quietly in wait and then pounced at the appropriate moment. 

Actually, it was quite beautiful to watch. All Putin had to do was prepare for lunch. 

Obama did the rest.

From the standpoint of the American public it was a comedy of errors on the part of Obama and the Obama Administration.

Back in July of 2012, I wrote the following:  "Currently Russia and America have narcissists at the helms of both countries -- Obama in America and Putin in Russia.  Both are would-be dictators. Putin, in Russia, will probably be successful. 

Syria is a mess.  The Obama regime (Our narcissist) for some reason yet to be clearly defined to the American people seems to have some sort of vested interest in seeing that the Assad regime in Syria is dumped and a purely Islamic government is installed to rule Syria under Sharia/Islamic law. Now, Obama is never going to admit that, but, all things considered, that is the most likely outcome if, and when, Assad is shown the door -- or taken out the door on a slab.

Russia does not want to lose its warm water port privileges in Syria and it sure as heck does not want to lose such a valued customer for Russian arms, etc.  Plus, the Syrian situation allows Putin a shot at the world stage where he can flex his muscles in the spotlight for all the world to see.  He LOVES that!

Putin is not about to miss the opportunity to give Obama an opened palm slap right across the cheeks and he sees the Syrian situation as his means to accomplish that.

Putin sees an opportunity for a little pay-back (for the Russian version of defeat in Afghanistan) and he is laying it on very thickly. 

Putin is a punk.  A former KGB officer, he is skilled at what he is doing.  Obama is, well, frankly, I don't know WHAT he is beyond being a socialist/Marxist community organizer who would dearly love to make himself dictator of America.  I don't think he has thought much beyond that.  Putin doesn't think so, either.  That's why he is so sure he can make Obama look like a fool in the Syrian Situation.

My money is on Putin.

It is clear to Putin that Obama is in over his head in foreign affairs. It would seem that Putin and American conservatives arrived at the same conclusion rather a while ago ... " In the event you'd like to read the entire commentary, you'll find it at:  http://insightonfreedom.blogspot.com/2012/07/russias-syrian-trap-for-obama-j-d.html
 In closing last year's commentary, I made the following observation:  "For the US -- Syria is a set-up, a tiger pit, a trap.  Unlike most traps, this one has huge flashing neon-like signs warning the US of its dangers.  But -- with America's boy-king, Obama, fixated on securing reelection for a second shot at fundamentally changing America into a western Socialist/Marxist dung heap, there is every reason for Americans to worry that we will soon be entangled in yet another Middle Eastern Islamic blood feud in which both sides hate us before, during, and after the dust settles."  Source:  http://insightonfreedom.blogspot.com/2012/07/russias-syrian-trap-for-obama-j-d.html 

And so, America's wondrous journey with Obama continues as we lurch from one scandal to another, from one blunder to another, from one debacle to another, from one crisis to another. 

Only three more years to go.

© J. D. Longstreet

Read More

Muslim Persecution Of Christians: June, 2013

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

The Degradation of Christian Women under Islam

The degradation of Christian women living in the Islamic world continued in the month of June. In Syria, after the al-Qaeda linked rebel group conquered Qusair, a city of the governate of Homs, 15-year-old Mariam was kidnapped, repeatedly gang raped according to a fatwa legitimizing the rape of non-Sunni women by any Muslim waging jihad against Syria's government, and then executed.
According to Agenzia Fides, "The commander of the battalion 'Jabhat al-Nusra' in Qusair took Mariam, married and raped her. Then he repudiated her. The next day the young woman was forced to marry another Islamic militant. He also raped her and then repudiated her. The same trend was repeated for 15 days, and Mariam was raped by 15 different men. This psychologically destabilized her and made her insane. Mariam became mentally unstable and was eventually killed."

In Pakistan, Muslim men stormed the home of three Christian women, beat them, stripped them naked and tortured them, and then paraded them in the nude in a village in the Kasur district. Days earlier, it seems the goats of the Christian family had accidentally trespassed onto Muslim land; Muslims sought to make an example of the Christian family, who, as third-class citizens, must know their place at all times.

The rest of June's roundup of Muslim persecution of Christians around the world includes (but is not limited to) the following accounts, listed by theme and country in alphabetical order, not according to severity:

Attacks on Christian Worship: Churches and Monasteries

Iraq: During the middle of the night, armed men attacked St. Mary's Assyrian Catholic Church in Baghdad; they wounded two Christian guards, one seriously. Later the same day, bombs were set off at two Christian-owned businesses, both near the church; they killed one Christian shop owner, a parishioner at St. Mary's. Since the U.S. "liberation" of Iraq in 2003, 73 churches have been attacked or bombed, and more than half of the country's Christian population has either fled or been killed.

Kenya: Motorbike assailants hurled an explosive device into the Earthquake Miracle Ministries Church in Mrima village church compound during the Sunday of June 9, injuring 15 people, including one pastor who had both his legs broken, another pastor who sustained serious injuries, and a 10-year-old child. Said another church leader, "The Christians living around the scene of the incident are still in shock and are wondering as to the mission behind the attack, while several pastors looked demoralized. But others said prayers will help them stand strong in sharing the Christian faith." Islamic extremists from Somalia's jihadi organization Al Shabaab are suspected of this and other attacks on Christians in the coastal areas of Kenya.

Nigeria: Four churches were burned in an attack committed by members of the jihadi group Boko Haram in Borno State in the Muslim-majority north of the country. According to Agenzia Fides, "A group of armed men with improvised explosive devices and petrol bombs attacked the Hwa'a, Kunde, Gathahure and Gjigga communities on Gwoza Hills, burning the 4 churches, raiding and looting cattle and grain reserves belonging to the population." Discussing the ongoing terrorism Christians in the north are exposed to, one pastor lamented, "There are Christian villages that have been completely wiped out by these Muslim terrorists… Christian fellowship activities and evangelism outreaches are no longer possible…. For a number of years, the attacks on Christians in these three local government areas have caused the displacement of thousands of Christians there. There is a very lamentable problem, as we are no longer able to worship God as Christians in this part of Nigeria."

Syria: An Islamic jihadi rebel wearing a suicide belt reportedly detonated himself outside the Virgin Mary Greek Orthodox Church in an old Christian quarter in Damascus; the attack left four people dead and several injured. Rebel sources confirmed the attack but said it was caused by a mortar bomb. Around the same time, jihadi rebels massacred the Christian village of al-Duwair near Homs, while destroying its churches. Also, according to Agenzia Fides, a Belgian Catholic priest, Fr. Daniel Maes, 74, of the religious Order of "Canons Regular Premonstratensian," was last reported as being "in the sights of jihadi groups who intend to eliminate him and invade the monastery of San James mutilated in Qara," which dates back to the fifth century. Earlier the priest had denounced the "ethnic cleansing" carried out on Christians in Qusair, after the town was taken by the rebels and jihadi groups: "The surrounding Christian villages were destroyed and all the faithful who were caught were killed, according to a logic of sectarian hatred… For decades, Christians and Muslims lived in peace in Syria. If criminal gangs can roam and terrorize civilians, is this not against international laws? Who will protect the innocent and ensure the future of this country? … Young people are disappointed, because foreign powers dictate their agenda. Moderate Muslims are worried, because Salafists and fundamentalists want to impose a totalitarian dictatorship of religious nature. The citizens are terrified because they are innocent victims of armed gangs."

Attacks on Christian Freedom: Apostasy, Blasphemy, Proselytism

Indonesia: The Indonesian Ulema Council in Tegal issued a fatwa against Catholic schools, saying they are "forbidden" and "morally unsound" for young Muslim students, despite its pupils, both Muslim and Christian, routinely scoring higher than in other schools. "For the schools," reported Asia News, "the fatwa is a great blow, coming in the wake of attacks from Muslim extremists and local governments that included threats of closure that were however eventually dropped… [M]any Muslim families have come to the defence of the two schools, claiming their right to a quality education. In fact, many schools run by nuns, priests and lay Catholics offer such excellence in education that they are sought after by non-Christians." Earlier the influential Indonesian Ulema Council lashed out during flag-raising "because Mohammed never did it;" before that announcement, the Islamic clerics "launched anathemas against Facebook for its 'amoral' nature, as well as yoga, smoking and voting rights, in particular for women."

Pakistan: A 16-year-old boy who converted to Christianity from Islam a year ago, and began attending Bible lessons in a Protestant community, was abducted in Peshawar. Local sources said he was kidnapped by Taliban-linked Islamic militants "and his fate may already be marked, as he is considered 'guilty of apostasy,'" the penalty of which is death. As one Pakistani pastor explained: "If a young Muslim converts to Christianity in Pakistan, he is forced to live in hiding. Every Muslim might feel compelled to kill him. The change of religion is not punished by the civil law, it is punishable by Islamic law. For this reason cases of Muslim conversion to Christianity are very rare and some convert in secret."

Somalia: Islamic terrorists from Al Shabaab ("The Youth") publicly executed a 28-year-old man after determining that he had in fact become a Christian. Aiming at his head, he was shot "to death." As Morning Star News explains, "Somalis are considered Muslim by birth, and apostasy, or leaving Islam, is punishable by death." After the execution, the man's parents, widow and son fled the region. The Al-Qaeda linked Al Shabaab has vowed to cleanse Somalia of all Christian presence, and its members have murdered dozens of Muslim converts to Christianity.

Uzbekistan: Four police officers raided the home of a 76-year-old Christian woman, ill with Parkinson's disease. After removing her from her bed and without producing a search warrant, they "turned everything in the home upside down," and confiscated her Bible and other Christian materials. Since then, the woman has been subjected to innumerable legal proceedings. Most recently, she was convicted of "Illegal production, storage, or import into Uzbekistan with a purpose to distribute or distribution of religious materials by physical persons." The judge ordered that her Bible, 14 Christian books, six DVDs and a video be destroyed. She was told by court officials, "This is a Muslim country and all of your Christian books including the Bible are outlawed." Because these proceedings have caused her extreme anxiety, after one hearing an ambulance was called for her.

Dhimmitude: A Climate of Hate and Contempt

Bangladesh: A mob of some "60 extremists" raided a predominantly Christian village. According to the Barnabas Aid group, "they plundered the residents' livestock and other possessions and threatened to return to burn down homes. The attackers then moved on to nearby Bolakipur and targeted a Christian seminary. Battering down the doors, they forced their way into the building and severely beat the rector and a number of students. The previous day, two church leaders from Tumilia were beaten and robbed."

Egypt: "Unknown persons" kidnapped a 7-year-old Christian girl in Dakhaleya Province in northern Egypt. The girl, Jessica Nadi Gabriel, was attending a wedding ceremony with her family when she was seized and torn away. Her father later revealed that the 7-year-old girl's abductors called him demanding a ransom of 650,000 Egyptian Pounds (nearly $100,000 USD). Two weeks earlier, a 6-year-old Coptic boy who was kidnapped and held for ransom, was still killed and discarded in the sewer—even after his family paid the Muslim kidnapper the demanded ransom. Also, a Coptic Christian man named Milad, living in Tanta, said that "unknown persons" invited him and his family to renounce Christianity and submit to Islam and convert. According to widely-read Egyptian newspaper, Youm7, "They also snatched at the crucifix he was wearing around his neck, and threatened to kidnap his children and wife if he refused to convert to Islam." As they wore the trademark white robes and long beards, the man identified them as members of the Salafi movement in Egypt. Meanwhile, U.S. ambassador Anne Patterson was urging the Coptic pope to forbid the Copts from protesting against Muslim Brotherhood rule -- even though they, as Christians, would suffer under it most -- while Al Azhar, the world's oldest Islamic university, based in Cairo, called on new Catholic Pope, Francis I, to declare that "Islam is a peaceful religion."

Iran: According to a June 19 Morning Star News report, "Six more Christians were sentenced for practicing their faith last week, while Iran's presidential election of a moderate politician was not expected to soften the regime's persecution of religious minorities." The same six Christians had been arrested earlier in February 2012, when police raided their house-church meeting. Officials rejected their appeal for release on bail; they are being held in Adel Abad Prison in Shiraz, which houses hardened criminals and often lacks heating or health facilities, and where officials routinely deny medical treatment to prisoners.

Pakistan: Three months after a mob of 3,000 Muslims attacked a Christian neighborhood in Lahore, burning down two churches and 160 Christian homes, few of the perpetrators are in prison. Hundreds of those detained immediately after the incident were released; of the 83 who were arrested, 31 have been released on bail. "Most of the people who were stopped after the attack were declared innocent by the police and immediately released, for corruption or political pressure," said a Christian lawyer. Meanwhile, the Christian whose arrest on blasphemy charges was the occasion for the rampage has gone on trial, even as he insists he never insulted Islam's Prophet Muhammad.

Palestinian Authority: Five schools in Gaza—two Catholic and three Christian—face closure if the Hamas government follows through on an order forbidding co-educational institutions. According to Fr. Faysal Hijazin: "This will be a big problem. We hope they will not go through with it, but if they do, we will be in big trouble. We don't have the space and we don't have the money to divide our schools." In addition to finding additional space, he said, the schools face having to hire more teachers. Under Islamic law, men and women teachers would not be allowed to teach classes to members of the opposite sex older than the age of 10. "It is a concern that in education things are getting more conservative," said the priest. "It reflects the whole society. This is of concern to both Christians and moderate Muslims. It is not easy to be there."

Tanzania: Two Christian pastors were attacked by Muslims. On the night of Sunday, June 2, a Muslim mob broke into the home of Robert Ngai, the pastor of the Evangelical Assemblies of God Church in northeastern Tanzania, and attacked him with machetes. The pastor received serious cuts on his hands and arms when he raised them to protect his head from the blows; when last heard of, he was in the intensive care unit. Two nights earlier, the home of Daudi Nzumbi, Pastor of the Free Pentecostal Church of Tanzania congregation in Geita, also came under attack. However, the attackers fled after they were confronted by Pastor Nzumbi's large, barking dogs. When Nzumbi called police, the officer in charge told him, "I cannot protect every pastor!"

About this Series

Because the persecution of Christians in the Islamic world is on its way to reaching pandemic proportions, "Muslim Persecution of Christians" was developed to collate some—by no means all—of the instances of persecution that surface each month. It serves two purposes:

1.  To document that which the mainstream media does not: the habitual, if not chronic, Muslim persecution of Christians.
2. To show that such persecution is not "random," but systematic and interrelated—that it is rooted in a worldview inspired by Sharia.

Accordingly, whatever the anecdote of persecution, it typically fits under a specific theme, including hatred for churches and other Christian symbols; sexual abuse of Christian women; forced conversions to Islam; apostasy and blasphemy laws that criminalize and punish with death those who "offend" Islam; theft and plunder in lieu of jizya (financial tribute expected from non-Muslims); overall expectations for Christians to behave like dhimmis, or second-class, "tolerated" citizens; and simple violence and murder. Sometimes it is a combination.

Because these accounts of persecution span different ethnicities, languages, and locales—from Morocco in the West, to India in the East, and throughout the West wherever there are Muslims—it should be clear that one thing alone binds them: Islam—whether the strict application of Islamic Sharia law, or the supremacist culture born of it.

Read More

Mr. Slick and Dummy encourage us to ignore the negatives of ethanol

There’s a TV commercial featuring a ventriloquist named Mr. Slick and his dummy, named “Dummy,” promoting the wondrous benefits of ethanol, not by actually listing those specific benefits – as one ought to do if one has real benefits to tout – but by implying that the evil oil companies don’t want you to know about them. Dummy answers questions that make the oil companies look bad, and Mr. Slick, portraying an evil oil baron, is horrified at Dummy’s responses and eventually puts his hand over Dummy’s mouth to shut him up. The announcer then asks the question, “Why don’t the oil companies want you to know the truth about ethanol?”

Ethanol has some useful qualities, like reducing the amount of petroleum-based fuels that are burned and the pollution they produce, but it has many disadvantages.

The all-knowing central planners at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have decreed that gasoline must currently have 10 percent ethanol (E10) mixed in, and the EPA is raising that requirement by 50 percent (E15), thus increasing by a half the negatives of ethanol in gasoline.

Putting ethanol in fuel means currently that approximately 40 percent of the corn from which ethanol is made is used for ethanol instead of food and animal feed. The amount of corn we burn could feed an estimated 570 million people annually. Shifting that much food corn to ethanol production raises the cost of food corn for human and animal consumption, as well as other food crops, such as wheat and hops, because farmers stop growing those crops and start growing corn to get the federal subsidies, and that creates shortages and higher prices for those crops, too. A PricewaterhouseCoopers study prepared for the National Council of Chain Restaurants said the federal ethanol mandate cost each restaurant $18,000 a year in higher food prices. Guess who pays that additional cost?

Every gallon of ethanol produced requires 5 gallons of water, and that affects the dry western states where ethanol is produced by shifting more of the sometimes-scarce liquid to farmers and away from urban areas, and could easily lead to water shortages and/or higher urban water prices.

Worse, however, is the great potential for damage to gas storage tanks, pumping equipment, other equipment involved in the delivery chain and engines that are the end user of ethanol in fuels. This point is supported by a December 2010 study commissioned by the Department of Energy that found 40 percent of new dispensing equipment designed for use with E10 fuels had failed tests, and 70 percent of previously used E10 equipment failed tests.

Ethanol fuels are deadly to small gasoline engines, such as lawnmowers, string trimmers, chain saws, boat motors, motorcycles and ATVs to the extent that manufacturers may void warranties when these fuels are used in their products.

Gasoline stabilizers must be added to ethanol infused gasoline to protect these smaller engines, at a cost, of course. But, however, owners of these machines have an option that car and truck owners don’t have: they can buy pure gasoline that has no added ethanol for only $20 to $32 a gallon.

If you get decent miles per gallon from your car or truck, you’d be getting even better mileage without ethanol in your gas. E10 and E15 mixtures routinely get fewer miles per gallon because ethanol contains less energy than pure gasoline. Estimates of lost miles per gallon range from 3-to-5 percent, to as high as 20 percent.

The Renewable Fuel Standard mandates the use of corn-based ethanol and other biofuels for transportation fuel. It promised less dependence on foreign oil and lower fuel prices and greenhouse gas emissions; however, many view the mandate as an economic and environmental boondoggle.

The benefits of infusing gasoline with ethanol to improve emissions from gas burning vehicles and tools are unclear. There has been some reduction in the use of petroleum in fuels, but the price we have paid for it has been comparatively high when the costs of producing ethanol and blending it with gasoline are considered, along with the increased prices of food for humans and animal feed. The House Energy and Commerce Committee has launched a bipartisan review of the Renewable Fuel Standard to determine its level of success.

Government efforts to make our lives better nearly always fail, or at least unleash new problems on the American people. The feds thought incandescent light bulbs that have served us so well for so long used too much energy, so they have mandated that we use the new CFL bulbs, which do use less electricity, but cost more and contain mercury, and create a haz-mat emergency when one of them breaks. Efforts to clean up emissions from electricity production have produced job losses in the coal and power industries and forced the sale of more domestic coal to foreign countries that do not make any effort to clean up their emissions.

Government mandates cost us billions of dollars a year for compliance, plus the cost of the bureaucracy to create and monitor compliance with regulations. Given the poor record of success the government has amassed, we’d be much better off with less government interference.

Read More

Beyond the Farthest Island ... J. D. Longstreet

Beyond the Farthest Island
The Mars One Project
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
*****************

I read an article recently that would-be space pioneers are signing up in droves to be the first humans to rocket to Mars -- and remain there for the rest of their lives.  No round trip, and no way back later, either.  At last count over 30,000 US citizen had already signed up to go, well, APPLIED for a seat on the ship to Mars.

When the vetting process is finished only four people will be chosen to go -- two men and two women.

Understand:  This is a ONE-WAY-TRIP ... period.  There ain't no coming back to ole Mother Earth.

Consider this from http://www.digitaltrends.com/
"It’s not certain if it’s a mark of how miserable people are feeling about life on terra firma, or an indication of just how far people are prepared to go to satiate their appetite for adventure (possibly a mixture of the two?), but 100,000+ applications for a one-way ticket to Mars is an impressive figure in anyone’s book.

We’re talking about the Mars One project; you may have already heard of it. The Dutch-based company behind the plan – and yes, it is for real – wants to colonize the red planet, kicking things off in nine years’ time with its very first mission.

The application process, which opened in April, costs $38 and involves submitting a resume, a letter outlining the motivation behind your application, and a video – a selection of which can be viewed here – explaining why you’d like to be considered."  SOURCE:  http://www.digitaltrends.com/international/mars-one-project-more-than-100000-sign-up/

The article continues:  "The plan is to select a group of 40 of the best applicants from around the world by the end of this year, before whittling it down to just four – two men and two women. If all goes to plan, the mission will blast off in September 2022, arriving on Mars seven months later in April 2023. Another four people would be sent to Mars two years later."  SOURCE: http://www.digitaltrends.com/international/mars-one-project-more-than-100000-sign-up/#ixzz2eJq1Hnvb

If you think you detect a bit of excitement in the scribe's pen when writing about space travel, space exploration, and space colonization, you are absolutely correct.  It is a dream I have had since childhood. 

See, I am convinced that man's destiny lies out there -- among the stars -- and even beyond the stars.

Man is inherently an explorer.  We yearn to learn what's over the most distant hill, around the next corner, beyond the moon, past the galaxy, past the universe, and on and on and on. 

I had once thought that space exploration and colonization should belong to governments.  I no longer hold that opinion.  As one looks at the early history of America we see that private companies financed a great deal of the exploration of this continent.

Yes, I am aware that by allowing private companies to lead the way in the exploration and colonization of new world planets, some of them will become unbelievably wealthy with treasuries exceeding those of many countries on earth.  Entire planets, entire worlds, will be owned by -- and governed by --  CORPORATIONS.  And why not?  They will have bought and paid for the privilege.

But a clash is already forming.  There will be future clashes between governments and private companies over property rights, mineral rights,  even real estate, and such, in space.  We've seen it all before, except right here on earth.  It all got sorted out, to one degree or another, in time.

Earth governments already aggressively exploring space are not just spending all that cash for the prestige of being a space-faring nation,  Oh, no.  They are looking for a return on all that spent cash.  They can be expected to "protect" their investments in space aggressively,  And, hey!  There's no law in space.  So, "what ever it takes" may well become a watch word in settling disagreements way out there beyond the reach of the so-called long arm of the law.

So far as having only adherents to conservative politics (as I have suggested) as the colonists of Mars and/or other planets, well, yes, my tongue was resting firmly in my cheek.  BUT, having said that, it might be worthy of considering having colonies consisting of colonists who share the same political ideology.  Having a capitalist planet and a communist planet separated by a few hundred light years does have a certain appeal, I must say.

However this all shakes out, it will be a whole new world(s) in less than ten years when Mars One blasts off.  Hopefully, those chosen to populate the new colony will shake off much of our divisive philosophies leaving them here, on earth, where they were created. 
Then, again, that's not realistic.  We are, after all, only human.  That has not , nor will it, change.  We're an exasperating lot.  Even God, Himself, repented, at least once, that he created us.

Now, we are about to go traipsing around in the Garden of God, out beyond the blue cloak of this earth, hopefully, we will be respectful of the endless power, majesty and beauty of that realm.

Since man's earliest sentient moments he has gazed longingly at the stars of the night sky.  A yearning akin to homesickness seems to emanate from his soul.  Only a hopeless romantic, or a fool, such as yours truly, would dare think it possible that man is finally preparing to go "home."  Then, most of us who hail from northern European ancestry have a tad of the Viking in our DNA.  Maybe, like our ancient forbearers we, too, have a longing to learn what is just past the farthest Island.   Indeed, we do.

© J. D. Longstreet

Read More

Syria: wrong war, wrong time, wrong president

Syria: wrong war, wrong time, wrong president

 

America is on the eve of another mistake. Arm twisting, not to dissimilar to the efforts made for Obamacare, have resurfaced to force passage of Congressional authorization to attack Syria. Will President Obama grease the fingers of members of Congress to obtain their vote, as he has done under other circumstances, will be revealed as the process moves forward. Secretary of State John Kerry has been roaming the media for support to rage yet another war in the Middle East. He has been challenged and in some cases impugned for his stance on the Syrian dilemma. John Kerry, no stranger to controversy, has provided quasi answers to direct questions concerning chemical weapons used on Syrian civilians. His success in moving Obama’s agenda forward appears to be failing. Recent reports on Drudge and Fox news indicate there are not enough members of either house willing to stick their necks into another noose for Obama, as they did with the tragedy called Obamacare. President Obama has reluctantly sought Congressional approval for his pending folly. Many commentators suspect Obama wants shared responsibility with the legislative branch in case events do not pan out in America’s favor. Most recent statistics note over 100,000 dead since the Syrian civil conflict began. People displaced from their homes numbers one to two million. Aside from the carnage, cities have been devastated by sustained bombings and brutal combat. Syria and its President harbor no fondness for America. Without this civil conflict raging, Syrians would once again turn their attentions to destroying Israel and American interests. The logical question to ask: Why is Obama pushing for intervention at this late date? He claims someone must hold Syria responsible for using chemical agents on a civilian population. Reports indicate chemical weapons may have been used several times in the past 30 months, without a whimper from the White House. There may be more reasons that have not been revealed by the Obama Administration for this poorly defined mission. Obama’s ineffectual style of management, for this war effort to nowhere, can be viewed on many levels. He has literally told Assad what his plans are for a potential attack.  There are no clear cut goals established by the President and no exit strategy. Obama requested permission for a brief assault, yet his Congressional minions are requesting a minimum of ninety days. No boots on the ground is another fallacy thrown into the mix. America is about to make a bigger mistake than electing the present occupant of the White House. This one will cost the lives of too many innocents to be worth the incursion. Congress should vote down any request for a Syrian attack. If Obama then goes it alone, the ramifications could be enough to draw impeachment charges against him. Let us all hope saner minds prevail. Mark Davis, MD President of Healthnets Review Services and Davis Book Reviews. Author of Demons of Democracy and the forthcoming book, Obamacare: Dead on Arrival, A Prescription for Disaster. www.healthnetsreviewservices.com platomd@gmail.com    twitter.com/americassage Manager of the group on LinkedIn, Government in Transition. Join us and comment on this and other political events taking place.

Read More