The US Constitution/Elena Kagan

Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, Democrats are lauding praise on the Elena Kagan, occasionally in the form of a question while Republicans are asking questions for which no answers are really expected. And thus it has been since Robert Bork was sent packing by such Constitutional giants as Ted Kennedy and Joe Biden.

Today, rather than have Bork’s clarity of opinion we have Elena Kagan explaining to Senator Tom Coburn “I don’t have a view of what are natural rights independent of the Constitution” during a discussion about fundamental “unalienable Rights” as expressed in the Declaration of Independence.

In that one brief statement Elena Kagan has shown the light on exactly what is wrong with the left and the progressives: They fundamentally misunderstand the relationship between the Constitution and the citizens. The Constitution is not the source of our rights. Our rights preceded the Constitution… despite the fact that most governments did not respect them.

The US Constitution fundamentally does two things. First it gives the three branches of government certain powers as primarily set forth in Articles I, II & III. The second thing it does, and this is largely rooted in the Bill of Rights, is constrain the government in terms of stating what it cannot do to citizens. The Bill of Rights does not confer rights on the citizenry; rather it specifies various rights the citizens have that the government may not encroach upon. Technically, the 6th and 7th Amendments do indeed confer upon citizens a number of rights: speedy trial, trial by jury etc., but these rights are specific in that they are protecting the citizens from government action rather than natural rights such as life, liberty, speech, etc.

Many years ago I heard a comparison between the United States and Mexico as thus: In the United States you have the right to do anything you want unless there is a law against it, while in Mexico you don’t have the right to do anything unless the government says it’s OK. Although from anecdotal evidence it sounds right, in reality I don’t know for certain that the Mexican element of the above statement is true. I do however know that the American part is, or at least was until the progressive cancer started to infect the American body politic early in the 20th Century.

In forming a government and writing our Constitution, the Founding Fathers understood that the citizens were giving to the federal government certain limited powers and giving up similarly limited rights specifically because there are things which are better performed by a federal government than individuals or states – national defense, coin money, patents, etc. Indeed the founding fathers were explicit about both of those factors, enshrining the primacy of individual rights in the 9th Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” and in the 10th Amendment demonstrating clearly that the federal government was not intended to be the regulatory leviathan that it has become: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

To recognize how central these limits were to the founding fathers and the country, one has to know that without the limits imposed by the Bill of Rights, the Constitution would never have been ratified and the United States would never have come into being as we know it.

During the Constitutional Convention of 1787 George Mason, a delegate from Virginia, and often called the Father of the Bill of Rights, fought vociferously for the inclusion of a Bill of Rights in the Constitution. James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, was against including such a bill for two primary reasons. First, he felt that the enumeration of some rights in the document might imply the absence of others, and second, it was his contention that such rights did not need enumeration or protection because the government had not been given the power to usurp them.

Madison won and the Constitution emerged from the Convention without Mason’s protections. So passionate was Mason about the need for those protections that he left the Convention and fought against the Constitution’s ratification in the Virginia legislature, sacrificing his lifelong friendship with his neighbor George Washington in the process.

On January 9th 1788 the Connecticut legislature ratified the Constitution by a vote of 128 to 40, the fourth state to do so out of the nine necessary for it (the Constitution) to take effect. It was then that the process hit a brick wall of Anti-Federalist opposition in Massachusetts. That opposition took the form of Sam Adams and John Hancock, who thought the Constitution vested too much power in the hands of the central government. Eventually the pair negotiated what became known as the Massachusetts Compromise, an agreement which allowed the state to ratify the Constitution with the explicit condition that the first order of business for Congress was to pass a bill of rights. If Congress failed to do so, the state’s ratification was revoked. Following Massachusetts, four of the next five states to ratify the Constitution incorporated that same language. As such, without the explicit promise of the protections enshrined in the Bill of Rights the Constitution would never have passed.

Which brings us back full circle to Elena Kagan. Later in her testimony she states that “I’m not saying I do not believe there are rights preexisting the Constitution and the laws, but my job as a Justice is to enforce the Constitution and the laws.” That’s the same kind of equivocating we heard when Senator Hatch asked if she had written a document he was holding in his hand: “The document is certainly in my handwriting.” In the above statement Kagan specifically avoids saying she believes “unalienable Rights” exist.

The Founding Fathers never intended for the Constitution to be the source of citizen’s rights. Rather, one of its original, specific purposes was to protect those “unalienable Rights” from an over reaching, tyrannical government. If Elena Kagan doesn’t have an understanding about that most basic element of the Constitution, how is she qualified to determine whether or not something is Constitutional in the first place?

Elena Kagan WHY She was nominated? By a House of Fools?

PROUD TO BE A BIRTHER

Senate Television / AP

WHY Elena Kagan was nominated

Sunday, August 22, 2010 10:46:55 PM

Someone figured out why Obama nominated Elena Kagan for the Supreme Court. Pull up the Supreme Courts website, go to the docket and search for Obama. Elena Kagan was the Solicitor General for all the suits against him filed with the Supreme Court to show proof of natural born citizenship. All of the requests were denied of course --- by Elena Kagan, the Solicitor General. The suits were never heard. Obama owes her big time. It just keeps getting deeper and deeper, doesn't it? The American people mean nothing any longer. It's all about payback time for those that compromised themselves to elect someone that maybe has no true right to even be there!

The news media will never tell us this --- even Fox News is afraid to say anything about the "natural born citizen" issue. I don't know what the truth is about Obama's birth certificate, and if Obama continues to have his way we will never know. Pass this along to anyone you think would actually care about this, so that people will know what is going on behind the scenes.

This take you directly to the Supreme Count page.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/09-6790.htm

Senate Television / AP

Elena Kagan Confirmed to Supreme Court, 63 to 37

-Patricia Murphy

Kagan will be sworn in soon to succeed retiring Justice John Paul Stevens and will have about two months to hire a staff and prepare for the court's opening session in October.

Elena Kagan Sworn in as 4th Woman in History on Supreme Court

-Tom Diemer

New Yorker Elena Kagan, sworn in by the chief justice Saturday, is the fourth woman in history to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Elena Kagan Draws Opposition From Senators Who Backed Sotomayor

-Patricia Murphy

The Supreme Court nominee's lack of courtroom experience is cited by senators, including Republicans, who voted for Sonia Sotomayor during her confirmation last year.

Sen. Ben Nelson Is First Democrat to Oppose Kagan for Supreme Court

-Christopher Weber

Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) said Friday he will vote against confirming Elena Kagan as a Supreme Court justice, making him the first Democrat to oppose President Obama's nominee.

Elena Kagan Approved by Senate Judiciary Committee; Lindsey Graham Votes Yes

-Patricia Murphy

Panel votes 13-6 to approve nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court. Full Senate expected to follow suit before August recess.

C. Everett Koop, Ex-Surgeon General, Comes Out Against Elena Kagan

-Christopher Weber

In an open letter, former surgeon general C. Everett Koop urges senators to vote against the confirmation of Elena Kagan.

Conservatives Step Up Attacks on Kagan: 'It's Not Over Till It's Over'

-Patricia Murphy

Conservatives, including the NRA and pro-life groups, are rallying members to oppose Kagan's nomination by weighing in on Facebook pages and websites, and by calling their senators.

Sen. John McCain Says He Will Vote Against Elena Kagan

-Christopher Weber

The Arizona senator joins a growing chorus of Republicans who oppose the president's nominee.

Sens. Orrin Hatch, Mitch McConnell to Vote Against Elena Kagan Supreme Court Nomination

-Patricia Murphy

Orrin Hatch and Mitch McConnell are the first senators to announce their opposition to Elena Kagan's nomination to the Supreme Court.

Elevation of Solicitor General to High Court is a Pragmatic Decision by President

The task of the Office of the Solicitor General is to supervise and conduct government litigation in the United States Supreme Court. Virtually all such litigation is channeled through the Office of the Solicitor General and is actively conducted by the Office. The United States is involved in approximately two-thirds of all the cases the U.S. Supreme Court decides on the merits each year. Elena Kagan was the Solicitor General so all "natural born citizen" Barack Obama case's came to her.

Barack Obama Appoints First Gay to Supreme Court in Elena Kagan, or Has He?

President Barack Obama has nominated Elena Kagan, the solicitor general of the United States, to the seat now held by Associate Justice John Paul Stevens, a liberal stalwart

who is retiring after 35 years on the Supreme Court. In an interesting development, when it became clear that Kagan had the inside track for the nomination, gay and liberal bloggers lauded Obama's impending selection of the first gay nominee on the High Court.

The Obama administration then went into attack mode, calling "rumors" that Elena Kagan was gay were part of a "right-wing smear campaign." The Obama spin operation targeted Ben Domenech, the conservative editor of The New Ledger, for his blog post "Obama's Top Ten Supreme Court Picks."

What was Domenech's offense? He wrote that the Kagan nomination "would please much of Obama's base. I have to correct my text here to say that Kagan is apparently still closeted -- odd, because her female partner is rather well known in Harvard circles" (Italics are the author's). Subsequently, he wrote an "apology" to Kagan in The Huffington Post.

It was a bruising battle of reverse political correctness. It is highly interesting as Kagan is a supporter of limits on free speech in the matter of political correctness, which is indicative that she is no civil libertarian. She may actually be a closet conservative. Her nomination is part of a course being navigated by the Obama administration that increasingly plots it towards a position on the center-right.

If the Bill Clinton administration is any clue, Obama is tacking to the right in order to bolster his chances at re-election. Elena Kagan served in the Clinton Justice Department and is strongly backed by the former President.

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer for PRESIDENT

PHOENIX -- Arizona Governor Jan Brewer demanded Friday that a reference to the state’s new immigration law be removed from a U.S. government report to the United Nations’ human rights commissioner. http://www.azgovernor.gov/dms/upload/PR_082710_LetterSecretaryClinton.pdf
The U.S. State Department included President Barack Obama's Justice Department legal challenge to the law on a list of accomplishments that show the federal government is protecting human rights.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/146379.pdf
In her memorandum to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Brewer stated that it was "downright offensive” that a state law would be included in the report, which was drafted as part of a UN review of human rights in all member nations every four years. “The idea of our own American government submitting the duly enacted laws of a state of the United States to ‘review’ by the United Nations is internationalism run amok and unconstitutional,” Brewer wrote. The Obama Administration made public its first-ever report to the United Nations Human Rights Council detailing the condition of human rights in America and subjecting the nation to criticism from countries like Iran, Cuba, China and others. According to the report, the United States violates human rights because of high unemployment rates, hate crimes, poverty, poor housing, lack of access to health care, and discriminatory hiring practices affecting Blacks, Latinos, Muslims, South Asians, Native Americans, and homosexuals. The report also discusses the rate of sexual assault in U.S. prisons and the detention of suspected terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. "It is a disgrace when this President denigrates his own country to curry favor with the despots and thugs at the United Nations. Obviously, President Obama sees America and a global villain," said former intelligence officer and police detective Sid Franes. "When the United Nations first approached U.S. officials about 'human rights inspections," the Bush administration refused to allow any infringement on national sovereignty. Of course, we had Ambassador John Bolton representing us in that corrupt institution and the liberals hated Bolton because he stood up to the UN establishment," he added. The report discusses Obama’s new healthcare and financial industry reforms, and the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009, which gives women the right to sue employers if they are paid less than men are. Obama also announced his commitment to repeal the military’s so-called “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. The report also discusses new regulations that increase accessibility for people with disabilities. The report says that it welcomes “observations and recommendations” from concerned members of the U.N. Human Rights Council, which includes countries such as North Korea, Saudi Arabia and Libya. President Obama is hoping these foreign nations “can help us on the road to a more perfect union.” The administration went on to say that “Although we have made great strides, work remains to meet our goal of ensuring equality before the law for all.”
What the Human Rights report did not mention were incidents of physical violence perpetrated against Tea Party participants. It also failed to mention voter intimidation by the New Black Panther Party and the questionable activities of ACORN.

Brewer Pushes Back Against Human Rights Report

By Elise Foley 8/30/10 8:35 AM

Already the front-runner in the Arizona gubernatorial race, Gov. Jan Brewer continued to stake out her anti-Obama administration position on immigration Friday with a sternly-worded letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Brewer’s beef was with a report to the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. As part of a 29-page summary of the state of human rights in the U.S., the report mentions concerns over Arizona’s disputed SB 1070 immigration law:

A recent Arizona law, S.B. 1070, has generated significant attention and debate at home and around the world. The issue is being addressed in a court action that argues that the federal government has the authority to set and enforce immigration law. That action is ongoing; parts of the law are currently enjoined.

In her Friday letter to Clinton, Brewer demanded the State Department remove the paragraph in SB 1070, calling the inclusion of the law “downright offensive” because SB 1070 includes provisions for human rights. She also argued the administration should secure the border to prevent high death rates of border crossers.

As Brewer moves closer to the gubernatorial election in November, her tough stance on immigration will make her hard to beat, experts told the Associated Press this weekend. Her opponent, Democrat Terry Goddard, must combat Brewer’s growing notoriety and newfound popularity. Brewer took over as governor after Gov. Janet Napolitano (D) left to join the Obama administration, but saw a boost in her approval ratings after she signed SB 1070.

An Aug. 25 poll put Brewer’s approval rating among Arizona voters above Obama’s. While 65 percent of Arizonans said they approved of Brewer, only 39 percent approved of Obama.

Cruel and Usual Punishment "U.S. constitution is Sharia compliant"

Imam Feisal Abdel Rauf claims:
"That the U.S. constitution is Sharia compliant."

Sharia for Dummies

Imam Feisal Abdel Rauf claims that the U.S. constitution is Sharia compliant.

Now let us examine below a few laws of Sharia to see how truthful Imam Rauf is:

1- Jihad, defined as “to war against non-Muslims to establish the religion,” is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (Caliph). Muslim Caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Sharia and unfit to rule.

2- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power meaning through force.

3- A Caliph is exempt from being charged with serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape.

4- A percentage of Zakat (charity money) must go towards jihad.

5- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust.

6- A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave and a male.

7- The Muslim public must remove the Caliph if he rejects Islam.

8- A Muslim who leaves Islam must be killed immediately.

9- A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of: 1) an apostate 2) an adulterer 3) a highway robber. Vigilante street justice and honor killing is acceptable.

10- A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim, but will get it for killing a Muslim.

11- Sharia never abolished slavery, sexual slavery and highly regulates it. A master will not be punished for killing his slave.

12- Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, amputation of limbs, flogging even for crimes of sin such as adultery.

13- Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims under the law. They must comply to Islamic law if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission. A non-Muslim is no longer protected if he leads a Muslim away from Islam.

14- It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims. But Muslims can curse non-Muslims.

15- A non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim.

16- Banks must be Sharia compliant and interest is not allowed.

17- No testimony in court is acceptable from people of low-level jobs, such as street sweepers or bathhouse attendants. Women in low level jobs such as professional funeral mourners cannot keep custody of their children in case of divorce.

18- A non-Muslim cannot rule — even over a non-Muslim minority.

19- Homosexuality is punishable by death.

20- There is no age limit for marriage of girls. The marriage contract can take place anytime after birth and can be consummated at age 8 or 9.

21- Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husband’s obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her and keep her from leaving the home.

22- Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: “I divorce you” and becomes effective even if the husband did not intend it.

23- There is no community property between husband and wife and the husband’s property does not automatically go to the wife after his death.

24- A woman inherits half what a man inherits.

25- A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and none of them have a right to divorce him — even if he is polygamous.

26- The dowry is given in exchange for the woman’s sexual organs.

27- A man is allowed to have sex with slave women and women captured in battle, and if the enslaved woman is married her marriage is annulled.

28- The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man.

29- A woman loses custody if she remarries.

30- To prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses.

31- A rapist may only be required to pay the bride-money (dowry) without marrying the rape victim.

32- A Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body, which is considered “Awrah,” a sexual organ. Not all Sharia schools allow the face of a woman exposed.

33- A Muslim man is forgiven if he kills his wife at the time he caught her in the act of adultery. However, the opposite is not true for women, since the man “could be married to the woman he was caught with.”

34-It is obligatory for a Muslim to lie if the purpose is obligatory. That means that for the sake of abiding with Islam’s commandments, such as jihad, a Muslim is obliged to lie and should not have any feelings of guilt or shame associated with this kind of lying.

The above are clear-cut laws in Islam decided by great Imams after years of examination and interpretation of the ’s life. Now let the learned Imam Rauf tell us: What part of the above is compliant with the U.S. Constitution?

U.S.A. Homegrown jihadis

The Fox News documentary hosted by E.D. Hill about the threat of homegrown terrorists. The threat is real and homegrown jihadis nearly always get their start online. The video is in four parts posted below. Watch it all and pass it on.

The following report about recruiting methods Jihadis are using. Portraying jihad as a "cool" path to follow only reveals the stupidity of some factions of Islam, especially the youth. There is nothing "cool" about killing and bombing innocent victims. These young factions haven't learned the lessons to improve civilization through diplomacy, decency and intelligence. Jihadis need to remember that the first offender to ignite a fuse is the first to run out of ideas.

Jihadi Cool: Terrorist Recruiters' Latest Weapon
by DINA TEMPLE-RASTON, 2010

With so many terrorism cases emerging in the U.S. in the past nine months, experts are trying to understand why so much is happening now. One explanation has less to do with religion than with adventure. The latest wave of jihadists traveling to Pakistan and elsewhere for training may have been motivated by a sense of jihadi cool.

The recent Jihad Jane case may be the latest example of this trend.

Colleen LaRose, 46, was a housebound woman from the Philadelphia area. She converted to Islam, but investigators say she was never connected to any particular mosque. Even her live-in boyfriend says he didn't know she was Muslim.

And yet, she is accused of calling herself Jihad Jane in Internet chat rooms, and soon after her conversion allegedly went trolling for people who might join forces with her to wage jihad on behalf of other Muslims.

That's a far cry from what is seen as the traditional route to jihad. It used to be that jihad Quran.

These days, many of them are decidedly less religious. They look more like something that would appear on MTV.

If you type "jihadi rap videos" into any Internet search engine, you'll find dozens of videos with thumping bass lines and forced rhymes about beheading non-Muslims and making them pay for the indignities they have leveled
against Islam.

'A New Generation Of Lazy Muslims'

Intelligence officials say there is a wave of young people who are attracted to the adventure of jihad but would like to skip all the rigors of Islam, such as reading the Quran and fasting.

"I think what we are seeing is sort of what I like to term a new generation of lazy Muslims," says Arsalan Iftikhar, a human rights lawyer and the former national legal director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

"These are people who might not be theologically devout or even have a sound religious foundation, but they are using this new jihadi cool to justify criminal acts of terrorism," Iftikhar

Experts who study these kinds of movements say that while religion may be an initial motivation to sign up, in the fullness of time, it becomes less important.

Seeking Adventure

Consider the case of the two dozen young Somali-Americans from Minneapolis who were recruited to join a militant group in Somalia a couple of years ago.

Initially, investigators say recruiters used a religious pitch. Ethiopians — who were largely Christian — had invaded Somalia, a Muslim country. The young Minnesotans were told it was their duty, both as Somalis and Muslims, to go to Somalia and fight there for an Islamic group called al-Shabab.

When the Ethiopian troops withdrew, FBI officials say the pitch changed. Recruiters told the young men that going to Somalia would be, in their words, fun. The young men would get to shoot guns. They would become jihad warriors. It would be cool.

Christine Fair is a professor at Georgetown University who is an expert in these kinds of religious movements. She says jihad chic is not so unusual.

"We have ethnographic where they actually ask militants what drew you to this movement," she says. "The top three answers were motorcycles, guns and access to women. You had to go pretty far down the list to get to religious motivation."

The Web And Jihad Warriors

The Internet appears to have made signing up for a holy war infinitely easier — and because it is open to all comers, the standards have dropped. People who might not have even considered becoming a Muslim, much less turning to jihad, can do both with just the click of a mouse.

That's what officials think happened with Jihad Jane. They allege that she trolled the Internet while she was housebound, caring for her boyfriend's ailing father, and that signing up for a holy war was something that attracted a lonely woman. It gave her something to belong to, officials say.

"Just putting my human hat on, I don't think it is remotely remarkable that Jihad Jane happened," says Fair, who is also a fellow at West Point's Combating Terrorism Center.

"In fact, if you sort of think about misfits — I'm a social misfit so I feel somewhat comfortable saying this — the Internet is one of the best places for social misfits to reside," Fair says. "They can be whomever they want to be, so I am just surprised we haven't had more Jihad Jane's."

This is not to minimize what is going on for the past year on the terrorism front. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, 2009 was the busiest year for U.S. counter terrorism officials. They prosecuted more than a dozen cases; the annual average is generally one-third of that.

FBI Director Robert Mueller says the Internet is partly to blame for speeding up the recruitment process. He says the Web now not only radicalizes young Muslims but helps connect them to organizations that launch attacks. Jihad cool may be a different motivation for taking up arms, but it isn't necessarily any less lethal.

FBI Known Terrorist Groups

Al-Qaida has cooperated with a number of known terrorist groups worldwide including:

•Armed Islamic Group
•Salafist Group for Call and Combat and the Armed Islamic Group
•Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Egypt)
•Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya
•Jamaat Islamiyya
•The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group
•Bayt al-Imam (Jordan)
•Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad (Kashmir)
•Asbat al Ansar
•Hezbollah (Lebanon)
•Al-Badar
•Harakat ul Ansar/Mujahadeen
•Al-Hadith
•Harakat ul Jihad
•Jaish Mohammed - JEM
•Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam
•Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan
•Laskar e-Toiba - LET
•Moro Islamic Liberation Front (the Philippines)
•Abu Sayyaf Group (Malaysia, Philippines)
•Al-Ittihad Al Islamiya - AIAI (Somalia)
•Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan
•Islamic Army of Aden (Yemen)

New York new Muslim Gay Bar A big hit!!!!

!!!New Book and movie Deal coming!!!!!!

Mullahs seem right in step with the Gay Bar Agenda.

Gutfled claims his gay bar idea is completely serious: "This is not a joke. I've already spoken to a number of investors, who have pledged their support in this bipartisan bid for understanding and tolerance."

They are ready to line up and to pay the cover to get into the new bar!!

This is a great idea, a gay bar in NY....How many is that now? There must be hundreds. I am not sure there are enough gay people ANYWHERE to need another gay bar in NY. There is also no need for all this silliness over a mosque down the street from that huge hole in the ground, but I do like this idea.... Maybe it will cut down on the violence of prayer rape.

Ahmadinejad said He will be at the opening of the Bar!!!

Maybe NY State will provide tax-free financing as they may do with the 911 Ground Zero mosque.

Greg Gutfled had the following commentary on his show "Red Eye" last night...

So, the Muslim investors championing the construction of the new mosque near Ground Zero claim it's all about strengthening the relationship between the Muslim and non-Muslim world. As an American, I believe they have every right to build the mosque - after all, if they buy the land and they follow the law - who can stop them? Which is, why, in the spirit of outreach, I've decided to do the same thing. I'm announcing tonight, that I am planning to build and open the first homosexual bar that caters not only to the west, but also Islamic homosexual men. To best express my sincere desire for dialogue, the bar will be situated next to the mosque Park51, in an available commercial space.

This is not a joke. I've already spoken to a number of investors, who have pledged their support in this bipartisan bid for understanding and tolerance. As you know, the Muslim faith doesn't look kindly upon homosexuality, which is why I'm building this bar. It is an effort to break down barriers and reduce deadly homophobia in the Islamic world. The goal, however, is not simply to open a typical homosexual bar, but one friendly to men of Islamic faith. An entire floor, for example, will feature non-alcoholic drinks, since booze is forbidden by the faith. The bar will be open all day and night, to accommodate men who would rather keep their sexuality under wraps - but still want to dance.

Bottom line: I hope that the mosque owners will be as open to the bar, as I am to the new mosque. After all, the belief driving them to open up their center near Ground Zero, is no different than mine. My place, however, will have better music.

Some proposed names...

The Queer'an

Gaybraham's

Mohammie's Retreat

The 72nd virgin

Jihad Me at Hello

The Gay Allahs

Allahu Gaybar

The Sphinx-ter

Queer Eye for the Jihad Guy

The Homo Side Bomber

Jihad's and Rods

Weapons of Ass Destruction

Allahs in Wonderland

Midnight at the Oasis

Mecca inn & out

SCUD Marks

Khomeini Men, Kholittle Time

Mo's Hole

Allah Akbar and Grill

Osama bin Dover

Gay Muslim Film Banned

The highly controversial and high profile documentary A Jihad for Love - the world's first feature-length film about Islam and homosexuality – has been banned by the censors from being shown at 21st Singapore International Film Festival where some 200 films will be screened.

The festival organizer told the Straits Times on Saturday that he was informed of the ban on Thursday over the phone by the Media Development Authority which oversees the censorship board.

A Jihad for Love was filmed over five years and in nine languages by India-born and raised director Parvez Sharma who traveled the world from India to Pakistan, Iran, Turkey, Egypt, South Africa and France to interview devout Muslims who are lesbian, gay or transgender to speak about their faith and their sexuality. In the film, a gay South African imam argues that homosexuality is not banned while another imam rebuts his view.

The paper quoted the chairperson of the board of Film Censors Amy Chua as saying that the film was “disallowed in view of the sensitive nature of the subject that features Muslim homosexuals in various countries and their struggle to reconcile religion and their lifestyle.”

About 14 percent of Singapore's 4.4 million population is Muslim.

According to traditional interpretations of the Quran, homosexuality is strictly forbidden and officially carries the death penalty in some Muslim or Muslim dominant countries including Iran, Saudi-Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Mauritania, Sudan and Nigeria.

Gay Mohammad art censored

Hera_sooreh_gay_mohammad_2

Gay Mohammad images on video and in photos were censored recently from a Dutch art exhibit. The artist was forced into hiding by death threats from Muslim extremists.

Iranian-born artist Sooreh Hera says that her images are an artistic expose of Islamic hypocrisy on homosexuality.

She photographed gay men in masks of Mohammad and his son-in-law Ali. Her video mixes photos of gay men and Muslim clerics, Islamic chants and the hard rock of “Gay Bar” by Electric Six.

The municipal museum in the Hague backed out of its plan to exhibit the photos from Hera’s “Adam and Ewald” series and a related video, according to recent news reports. Wim van Krimpen, director of the Gemeentemuseum, announced that the images were removed because “certain people in our society might perceive it as offensive.”

Hera, 34, accused the museum of caving in to pressure from Islamists, who also sent her death threats. Hera withdrew the rest of her photos from the show in protest, and another Dutch museum in Gouda has agreed to exhibit them in the future.

Her video “Allah ho Gaybar” was on YouTube for a few hours before it was removed for its provocative content. It is now available at a Dutch site.

A gallery of gay Mohammad photos can be viewed on Hera’s website. “Religion always wants to control human sexuality, most prominently with a compelling taboo on homosexuality,” she says in a statement on her site. “I have tried to show a recognisable beauty of homosexuals, but also an alienating beauty that to many may be unimagined, or dishonorable.”

In media interviews, Hera repeatedly criticizes countries such as Iran for imposing the death penalty for homosexual conduct.

The gay Mohammad controversy is especially interesting to me as a lesbian Christian art historian. I get many negative comments from Christian conservatives who are offended by the gay Jesus images in my websites and book Art That Dares. They often say that nobody would dare make a picture of a gay Mohammad because Islamic fundamentalists fight blasphemy with violence. Sometimes the Christian right sounds almost envious, as if they wished they could use violence instead of Christ’s command to “love your enemy.”

Well, the Christian right was wrong. Artists ARE making gay Mohammad images. As long as there is religious hypocrisy over homosexuality, artists will be making queer religious images that expose the truth. Society is enriched by the brave, powerful artistry of truth tellers like Sooreh Hera.

News reports about Hera and other artists addressing religion and homosexuality are included in the monthly Jesus in Love Newsletter on queer spirituality and the arts. I edit the newsletter and blog at the Jesus in Love Blog. Visit JesusInLove.org for more progressive spiritual resources.

(Photo above is from Adam and Ewald by Sooreh Hera)

Impeach Obama Sign

Man Arrested at Alaska State Fair for
Impeach Obama Sign
A brutal assault by security personnel on a LaRouche supporter.

"I have free speech!"

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - A supporter of frequent presidential candidate Lyndon LaRouche who carried a sign that called for President Barack Obama's impeachment was handcuffed and arrested at the Alaska State Fair in Palmer.

A bystander posted video of the incident on YouTube.

Fair officials say Sidney Hill drew complaints Thursday that he was disrupting fair entertainment.

The video shows Hill claiming his free speech rights were violated. He said he was disabled and that fair security personnel hurt him as they pinned him to the ground.

Fair spokesman Dean Phipps says the fairgrounds are private property and fair goers are subject to rules. He says excessive force was not used.

Hill was charged with assault, disorderly conduct and criminal mischief.

Read more: Fairbanks Daily News-Miner - Obama protester arrested at Alaska State Fair

This first day of the 2010 Alaska State Fair starts with sunny skies and a brutal assault by security personnel on a LaRouche supporter.

At about 5pm Alaska Time, Thursday, August 26, 2010, security personnel approach Sidney Hill, a lone man peacefully displaying an impeach Obama sign near Pioneer Plaza on the Alaska State Fairgrounds in Palmer. Minutes later, a crowd assembles, additional security forces arrive, and they physically assault the man holding the sign. He’s taken to the ground with force and detained.

An unidentified Alaska State Trooper arrives to physically disperse the crowd, and at several points during the conflict, crowd members yell in support of the demonstrator’s right to speak his message. The demonstrator’s personal firearm is confiscated by fair security, and he is held captive until Palmer police arrive to escort the man away in cuffs.

Sidney Hill was in jail awaiting a pre-trial at 1:00pm on August 27, 2010 at the Palmer Courthouse. He has been charged with Assault 4-Cause Fear Of Injury, Disorderly Conduct-Challenge To Fight, and Criminal Trespass 2- Upon Premises. However, according to the Valley Frontiersman newspaper, “Assistant District Attorney Trina Sears said her office decided not to prosecute Hill on the assault charge.”

Assault on protestor at 3:30

Trooper distracts me, but I barely catch the gun in security guard’s left hand at 4:41

Court record of arrest: http://bit.ly/bPSx6D
ADN coverage: http://bit.ly/bwE3u9
Frontiersman coverage: http://bit.ly/9V4gyn
Newsminer coverage: http://bit.ly/bEEq2K
Alaska State Fair official statement: http://bit.ly/cY5U2u

Traditional American Values

"Treat Obama like a used tea bag, toss him out now!"
Restoring Honor

The crowd attending the "Restoring Honor" rally, organized by Glenn Beck, is seen from the top of the Washington Monument in Washington, on Saturday, Aug. 28, 2010. In the foreground is the National World War II Memorial and the Lincoln Memorial is at the top.

Tens of thousands of Americans rallied in front of the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday to hear speeches about God and country in a conservative show of strength ahead of congressional elections this fall.

The organizer, Fox TV host Glenn Beck, who invited listeners to the U.S. capital to "restore America's honor," said he thought several hundred thousand people attended.

Many were members of the Tea Party, a loosely organized grassroots movement driven by conservative activists seeking lower taxes and more limited government.

Republicans hope to harness their anti-establishment fervor to win control of Congress from President Barack Obama's Democrats in November. But Tea Party adherents have also forced mainstream Republican candidates to tack to the right.

Beck and the Republican 2008 vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, both darlings of the Tea Party, urged a return to what they said were traditional American values of service to others and a belief in God.

"Something beyond imagination is happening," Beck declared. "America today begins to turn back to God."

Much of the rally was devoted to paying tribute to the U.S. military, including wounded veterans of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although both Palin and Beck are strong critics of the Obama administration's policies, they eschewed overtly political references, while expressing the desire for change.

"May this day be the change point," Palin said to applause from listeners, many of whom were waving American flags. "Look around you; you are not alone. You are Americans!"

MARTIN LUTHER KING'S NIECE SPEAKS

The rally was criticized by some civil rights leaders for being held on the same day and in the same place that Martin Luther King, Jr. gave his "I Have a Dream" speech 47 years ago.

Beck says the event was scheduled on that date by coincidence. But both he and Palin paid tribute to King, and giant TV screens on the Mall in front of the Lincoln Memorial played newsreel footage of King's 1963 speech.

"You have the same steel spine and moral courage as Washington and Lincoln and Martin Luther King," Palin told the crowd.

"It is in you. It will sustain you, as it sustained them. So with pride in the red, white and blue, with gratitude to our men and women in uniform, let's stand together, let's stand with honor, let's restore America."

King's niece, Alveda, also addressed the overwhelmingly white audience, telling them that the United States was still suffering "from the great evil divide of racism".

She said she believed her "Uncle Martin" would have been pleased to see them honoring soldiers and people doing charitable work. Among the honorees in the latter category was Albert Pujols, baseball player for the St. Louis Cardinals.

A competing march to celebrate King's legacy was organized by black leaders including Al Sharpton, who said Beck was distorting the slain civil rights leader's message.

Under the banner, "Reclaim the Dream," the group marched to the site of a memorial to King that is under construction and gave speeches there.

"They told me that others are going to be at the Mall and they are going to be standing where Dr. King stood," Sharpton told the group. "Well they may have the Mall, but we have the message. They may have the platform, but we have the dream."

D.C. police said they did not have a crowd estimate for either event.

Back at Glenn Beck's rally, some attendees stressed that they were not part of the Tea Party movement, but shared many of its concerns. They complained about mounting U.S. debt, the "arrogance" of U.S. leaders and what they saw as a "socialist" agenda among Obama's Democrats.

"Everything they want to do is socialistic," said Dana Gowen, 65, of Orlando, Florida. He was carrying a sign that said: "Are we really 1.4 trillion in debt?"

WASHINGTON — Conservative commentator Glenn Beck and tea party champion Sarah Palin appealed Saturday to a vast, predominantly white crowd on the National Mall to help restore traditional American values and honor Martin Luther King's message. Civil rights leaders who accused the group of hijacking King's legacy held their own rally and march.

While Beck billed his event as nonpolitical, conservative activists said their show of strength was a clear sign that they can swing elections because much of the country is angry with what many voters call an out-of-touch Washington.

Palin told the tens of thousands who stretched from the marble steps of the Lincoln Memorial to the grass of the Washington Monument that calls to transform the country weren't enough. "We must restore America and restore her honor," said the former Alaska governor, echoing the name of the rally, "Restoring Honor."

Palin, the GOP vice presidential nominee in 2008 and a potential White House contender in 2012, and Beck repeatedly cited King and made references to the Founding Fathers. Beck put a heavy religious cast on nearly all his remarks, sounding at times like an evangelical preacher.

"Something beyond imagination is happening," he said. "America today begins to turn back to God."

Beck exhorted the crowd to "recognize your place to the creator. Realize that he is our king. He is the one who guides and directs our life and protects us." He asked his audience to pray more. "I ask, not only if you would pray on your knees, but pray on your knees but with your door open for your children to see," he said.

A group of civil rights activists organized by the Rev. Al Sharpton held a counter rally at a high school, then embarked on a three-mile march to the site of a planned monument honoring King. The site, bordering the Tidal Basin, was not far from the Lincoln Memorial where Beck and the others spoke about two hours earlier.

Sharpton and the several thousand marching with him crossed paths with some of the crowds leaving Beck's rally. People wearing "Restoring Honor" and tea party T-shirts looked on as Sharpton's group chanted "reclaim the dream" and "MLK, MLK." Both sides were generally restrained, although there was some mutual taunting.

One woman from the Beck rally shouted to the Sharpton marchers: "Go to church. Restore America with peace." Some civil rights marchers chanted "don't drink the tea" to people leaving Beck's rally.

Sharpton told his rally it was important to keep King's dream alive and that despite progress more needs to be done. "Don't mistake progress for arrival," he said.

He poked fun at the Beck-organized rally, saying some participants were the same ones who used to call civil rights leaders troublemakers. "The folks who used to criticize us for marching are trying to have a march themselves," he said. He urged his group to be peaceful and not confrontational. "If people start heckling, smile at them," Sharpton said.

Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia's delegate to Congress, said she remembers being at King's march on Washington in 1963. "Glenn Beck's march will change nothing. But you can't blame Glenn Beck for his March-on-Washington envy," she said.

Beck has said he did not intend to choose the King anniversary for his rally but had since decided it was "divine providence." He portrayed King as an American hero.

Sharpton and other critics have noted that, while Beck has long sprouted anti-government themes, King's famous march included an appeal to the federal government to do more to protect Americans' civil rights.

The crowd — organizers had a permit for 300,000 — was a sea of people standing shoulder to shoulder across large expanses of the Mall. The National Park Service stopped doing crowd counts in 1997 after the agency was accused of underestimating numbers for the 1995 Million Man March.

It was not clear how many tea party activists were in the crowd, but the sheer size of the turnout helped demonstrate the size and potential national influence of the movement.

Tea party activism and widespread voter discontent with government already have effected primary elections and could be an important factor in November's congressional, gubernatorial and state legislative races.

Lisa Horn, 28, an accountant from Houston, said she identifies with the tea party movement, although she said the rally was not about either the tea party or politics. "I think this says that the people are uniting. We know we are not the only ones," she said. "We feel like we can make a difference."

Ken Ratliff, 55, of Rochester, N.Y., who served as a Marine in the Vietnam War, said he is moving more in the tea party direction. "There's got to be a change, man," he said.

Palin told the crowd she wasn't speaking as a politician. "I've been asked to speak as the mother of a soldier and I am proud of that distinction. Say what you want to say about me, but I raised a combat vet and you can't take that away from me." It was a reference to her son, Track, 20, who served a yearlong deployment in Iraq.

Palin likened the rally participants to the civil rights activists from 1963. She said the same spirit that helped them overcome oppression, discrimination and violence would help this group as well.

"We are worried about what we face. Sometimes, our challenges seem insurmountable," Palin said. "Look around you. You're not alone."

Beck paced on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and spoke through a wireless microphone headset. "For too long, this country has wandered in darkness. ... Today we are going to concentrate on the good things in America, the things that we have accomplished — and the things that we can do tomorrow."

In one of his many references to King, Beck noted that he had spent the night before in the same Washington hotel where King had put the finishing touches on his "I Have a Dream" speech.

Clarence B. Jones, who served as King's personal attorney and his speechwriter, said he believes King would not be offended by Beck's rally but "pleased and honored" that a diverse group of people would come together, almost five decades later, to discuss the future of America.

Jones, now a visiting professor at Stanford University, said the Beck rally seemed to be tasteful and did not appear to distort King's message, which included a recommitment to religious values.

Both groups heard from members of the King family.

Alveda King, a niece of the civil rights leader, appealed to Beck rally participants to "focus not on elections or on political causes but on honor, on character ... not the color of our skin."

Martin Luther King III said at the site of the planned memorial that his father in 1967 and 1968 "was focused on economic empowerment. He did not live to see that come to fruition." King added, "We have made great strides, but somehow we've got to create a climate so that everybody can do well, not just some."

Beck had appealed to those attending not to bring signs with them. But Mike Cash, a 56-year-old Atlanta businessman, found a way around that. Over his polo shirt, he wore a T-shirt that read "Treat Obama like a used tea bag, toss him out now!"

"I wouldn't have missed it (the rally) for anything," said Cash, who drove up with his family. "We are here kind of protesting about our government, too. I'm a businessman and I'm worried about taxes going up."

Many in the crowd watched the proceedings on large television screens. On the edges of the Mall, vendors sold "Don't Tread on Me" flags, popular with tea party activists. Other activists distributed fliers urging voters "dump Obama." The pamphlet included a picture of the president with a Hitler-style mustache.

LaVert Seabron, 80, a retired federal public health officer who lives in northwest Washington, said he was at the 1963 march and made it a point to attend Saturday's rally. He recalled King as a "great orator" and said "because of what he did we're here." Seabron, who's black, said he was heartened to see many young people at Saturday's event.

"It's good to see the next generation is still participating," he said. "We've been through this. It's good to see so many young people, because they'll have to pick up the torch and carry it to the next generation."

Regarding the Beck rally, Seabron said: "That's part of a democracy — everybody gets a chance to say what they want."