Free speech takes a hit at Columbia University

Free Speech Takes A Hit (an editorial from the Hartford Courant published on 10/17/06 about two very different incidents at Columbia University)...but did it really?

On Friday, October 13, 2006 Gateway Pundit's post Former Nazi: "Today's Leftist Youth Like Hitler's Storm Troopers" , provided this revealing information about the nature of what really happened at Columbia University.

A former Nazi youth, was interviewed on Hannity and Colmes on Thursday night and warned that today's leftist youth protesters behave like Hitler's Storm Troopers... No kidding! Hilmar ought to know!

Flopping Aces has the video: The Leftist Attack On Free Speech posted By Curt on 10/13/06.


And the other invited guest mentioned in the Courant?


Mixed reports on Columbia dis-inviting Iranian President Ahmadinejad Published by Shoshana Olidort 9/21/06.

Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs apparently extended an invitation to Iranian President Ahmadinejad to speak at the school’s World Leaders Forum. According to Columbia Spectator and JTA, the invitation was accepted but the event, which was scheduled for Rosh Hashana eve, was cancelled because the “school couldnt make proper security and logistical arrangements.” But BWOG reports that Public Affairs Director Robert Hornsby denied the event was ever scheduled. The New York Sun reported that the invitation was shrouded in “secrecy and confusion,” with President Bollinger’s statement about the invitation released just before midnight last night. The same article noted that Columbia’s vice president for public affairs, Susan Brown, denied the invitation, calling it a rumor.
LionPAC, Columbia’s pro-Israel student group posted flyers protesting the event across campus.

What Wouldn't Ahmadinejad Do? By Bari Weiss and Birk Oxholm
Issue date: 9/22/06 Section: Opinion at the Columbia Spectator

In Ahmadinejad's Iran, gays are killed, women are stoned, and democratic activists are flogged in public squares. He has jailed dissidents. He has denied the Holocaust. He has gleefully called for the destruction of the Jewish state. We have said no to hateful words, but we have reached out to a perpetrator of hateful deeds.

I do not think that inviting law-abiding United States citizens to an American university is the same as inviting known murderers and thugs who have sworn to destory Israel, and our First Amendment rights to freedom of speech should not apply to non-citizens. Our constitution is for the citizens of the United States. Other countries do not use our consitution to govern their own countries and their own people.

Use YouTube? You need to know this!

To YouTube customers:

Start downloading your favorite YouTube videos today because Google is going to have to clean house in a major way - and soon.

My guess is there will be a rapid-action pipeline set up between Google Legal and YouTube and as soon as credible complaints start coming in, there will be a team of people in place to - manually - make the copyright violating vides disappear one by one.

Read more here: If you can't beat them, buy them (10/11/06)

Evan Sayet

8PM Saturday, October 28th, The Friars of Beverly Hills:

The Four Great Religious Truths

It's important for those of all faiths to recognize these four religious truths:


1. Muslims do not recognize Jews as God's chosen people.


2. Jews do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.


3. Protestants do not recognize the Pope as the leader of the Christian World.


4. Baptists do not recognize each other at Hooters.

Sauron destroys Israel

George Soros (aka Sauron) and his wealthy Jewish American friends "have now decided to aim their fire directly at Israel" according to a report from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

Here's some highlights from an article by Caroline Glick (senior Middle East fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post): Soros moves on to Israel

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's speech at the American Task Force for Palestine's inaugural dinner in Washington on Wednesday evening was but the latest sign that America's alliance with Israel is weakening.

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

The Democratic Party's sharp turn leftward in recent years has been a major factor in weakening the US-Israel alliance. The ideological transformation of the party is the fruit of a collaborative effort by leading financiers, radical-leftist ideologues and political activists. Together these forces built organizations that dictate the party's agenda; finance the campaigns of politicians who embrace this agenda; and work to defeat conservative Republicans and Democrats who disagree with their agenda.

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

MoveOn.org is the most influential organization of this type established in recent years. Its principal financiers are American Jewish billionaires George Soros and Peter Lewis.

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

...it is not too late to change course. The Jewish American anti-Israel lobby is scheduled to be launched on October 26. Now is the time for the Olmert government to forthrightly announce that the new lobby is not pro-Israel, but rather anti-Israel.

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

Like Jews for Jesus, Jews who work to weaken Israel's security, undermine Israel's relations with the US and strengthen Israel's enemies take themselves beyond the broad tent of the American Jewish pro-Israel community.

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

Israel's alliance with the US is based on the fact that most Americans support Israel. American support for Israel finds its roots in foundations as diverse as religion, politics, morality, security, culture and economics. While the alliance is visibly weakened, its foundations remain solid. To rebuild American political support for Israel and to enhance the US-Israel alliance, it is imperative that Israel be capable of understanding the nature of this support. This understanding begins by making distinctions between our many friends and our foes and acting on these distinctions. Not all of our friends are Jews and not all Jews are our friends.

Whose side are you on?

Fundamental difference

One day a florist goes to a barber for a haircut. After the cut he asked about his bill and the barber replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The florist is pleased and leaves the shop.

The next morning when the barber goes to open his shop there is a thank you card and a dozen roses waiting for him at his door.

Later, a cop comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The cop is happy and leaves the shop.

The next morning when the barber goes to open up there is a thank you card and a dozen donuts waiting for him at his door.

Later a Republican comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The Republican is very happy and leaves the shop.

The next morning when the barber goes to open, there is a thank you card and a dozen different books such as "How to Improve Your Business" and "Becoming More Successful."

Then a Democrat comes in for a haircut, and when he goes to pay his bill the barber again replies: "I'm sorry, I cannot accept money from you; I'm doing community service this week." The Democrat is very happy and leaves the shop.

The next morning when the barber goes to open up, there are a dozen Democrats lined up waiting for a free haircut.

(And that, my friends, illustrates the fundamental difference between left and right...)

International black slavery ring?

I know I'm using a lot of "question marks" in my titles these days...it's just a combination of the absurdity of modern life combined with a fear of lawsuits (bloggers are starting to get sued now since the Foley scandal).

Today's thought is, regarding Madonna's newest adventure/competition, which strangely resembles the recent adventures of Brad and Anjie: Are poor little black children from third world countries considered property or are they just considered kids-up-for-adoption like in the U.S.?

Has Eye of the Child (the only search results I found for them brings up stuff like "pink eye and your child") discovered an international black slavery ring? Or has it just stumbled upon a new superstar reality show?

"It's not like selling property," said a statement by Eye Of The Child. They were speaking a day after Malawi's High Court granted an interim order for the star to adopt the boy, named as David Banda. "It is about safeguarding the future of a human being who, because of age, cannot express an opinion," said the group.

Aside from the fact that adopting-poor-little-dark-children-from-third-world-countries seems to be in vogue with the Hollywood crowd these days, I sense a sequel coming: "I was Madonna's son for a day"--or a week or a month or however long this newest drama lasts).

I can't wait.

Censorship in America?

Isn't it ironic that it is ostensibly the most vocal group for civil rights and human rights and "all that stuff" who ends up behind something like this:

[Michelle] Malkin may have been the first casualty in the coming information war but she certainly will not be the last. Yet online conservative elites seem not to care. They fail to realize that voters are increasingly accessing news and information from these new media sources and that these sources are using their editorial discretion to publish and promote a liberal — not conservative — agenda.

YouTube refused to say why her videos were “offensive” and there was no avenue available to challenge the decision. Today, her videos are gone and her voice is suppressed on the most important video “node” on the Internet.

Read more

Think this is just an isolated example? Look what happened when Minuteman founder Jim Gilchrist was invited to speak at Columbia University last week:

Everything you really need to know about the protesters is contained in this sentence: "Shame on the College Republicans for inviting this fascist thug and provoking such outrage on our campus." In other words, the act of inviting a controversial speaker is worse than violence against that speaker...oh, and the speaker must be a "fascist thug" because he doesn't agree with the writer's left-wing sensibilities which are typical of Columbia students.

Read more

Shame on these liberals! Shame on the real fascists in our country!

The David Zucker Albright Ad

Watch this "scary" campaign ad created by a Hollywood producer/director. It was supposed to be used by GOP groups in the final weeks of the 2006 campaign but they think it's just "too hot" to handle!

This is a recreation of former Clinton Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's 2000 visit to North Korea--one GOP strategist said: "Nobody could believe Zucker thought any political organization could use this ad. It makes a point, but it's way over the top."

Zucker (a long time Democrat) produced and directed such comedies as "Airplane" and "The Naked Gun." In 2004 he embraced the Republican Party based on concerns he had about national security issues and voted for President George W. Bush.

Clinton and The Bomb

After entering into an agreement with the United States in 1994, the Clinton administration ignored evidence the North Koreans were violating the agreement and continuing to build a nuclear weapon.

A review of recent history shows that that the Clinton administration gave up a clear and perhaps last best chance to nip the North Korean bomb in the bud:

Timeline of a Nuclear Bomb

Foley: The right fight

The glaring differences between the current House Speaker and the person who wants his job should make it easy for voters across the country to determine which candidate better represents their core beliefs regardless of what Foley has done. And, this same principle should apply to candidates in states and congressional districts across the country.

The fact is that people bothered by this incident should compare the voting records of those seeking to use this scandal to take over the Congress to those currently in control.

For example, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-California) has virtually the exact opposite voting record from Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois):

DENNIS HASTERT

NANCY PELOSI

Voted twice in 2003 for a bill outlawing partial birth abortions. Has consistently voted in favor of outlawing flag-burning. Voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. Voted against funding the National Endowment for the Arts in 1992 and 1998. Voted for all four articles of impeachment of President Bill Clinton in 1998. Voted for the Child Custody Protection Act in 2006. Voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill in 2003. Voted for the Border Security Bill in 2005. Voted for the Terry Schiavo Incapacitated Persons Bill in 2005. Voted against stem cell research in 2005 and 2006. Voted for the Same Sex Marriage Resolution (stating that marriage is a union between a man and a woman) in 2006. Voted for the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 1995, the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 twice, and the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 2003. Voted for the President’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. Voted for the Patriot Act in 2001, and its reauthorization in 2005.

She has consistently voted against any restrictions to abortion, including partial-births. She has consistently voted against laws that would ban flag-burning. Voted against the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996. Voted against all four articles of impeachment in 1998. Voted against the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill in 2003. Voted against the Child Custody Protection Act in 2006. Voted against the Secure Fence Act of 2005 and the Border Security Bill in 2005. Voted against reauthorizing the Patriot Act in 2005 and 2006. Voted for stem cell research in 2005 and 2006. Voted against the Same Sex Marriage Resolution in 2006. Voted against the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 1995, against the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 twice, and against the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 2003. Voted against the President’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.

THE AMERICAN THINKER

SO: JUST TALLY UP THE PROS AND CONS FOR YOURSELF
IT'S THAT EASY FOLKS!

It's gonna be a bumpy ride

In an email I received today, NewsMax.com reports thatCaroline Glick, Deputy Managing Editor of the Jerusalem Post said: “Any objective observer of the developments in our region understands that the storm of war is rapidly approaching us. With Moscow’s blessing, the Palestinians, Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran are steadfastly preparing for battle.”

I wanted to know more, so I found this article she wrote on 10/05/06:

"Column One: As the storm of war approaches"
The clouds of the coming war are converging upon Israel. But our political and military leaders refuse to look up at the darkening sky.

The Russian bear has awakened after 15 years of hibernation. Under the leadership of former KGB commander President Vladimir Putin, Russia is reasserting its traditional hostility towards Israel.

As Bette Davis once said in "All About Eve": Fasten your seat belts...it's gonna be a bumpy ride!

Democrats: Chardonnay-Swilling Surrender Junkies

America has polarized into two camps:


Republicans and other conservatives, who would rather fight than surrender.

Democrats and other Liberals, who would rather surrender than fight. They so covet power for themselves, and the illusion of a “peace” that cannot last, that, rather than join a Republican President, George W. Bush, in a determined war to defeat the anti-Liberal, anti-Democratic, Islamic Jihad, they would rather surrender their own future and freedom, surrender America’s future and freedom, and ultimately surrender the entire edifice of Western Civilization, Judeo-Christian Civilization, to an aggressive, intolerant, imperialist, militant, fundamentalist, terrorist Islamic theocracy that will ultimately destroy every freedom Liberal Democrats claim to be for.

“ . . . choose well,
your choice is brief,
and yet endless . . “
Goethe

Read more from Raymond Kraft, lawyer and writer living and working in Northern California.

Jimmy Carter: Anti-Semite?

WASHINGTON JEWISH WEEK (10/08/06):
Carter damages Israel’s and his own image by Ira Forman

President Carter unfairly damages Israel’s worldwide image when he resorts to distortions and falsehoods about her actions. He damages any realistic prospects for reviving the peace process when he ignores the deeply dysfunctional nature of Hamas ideology and policies. But perhaps the most tragic outcome of his charges is the damage it does to his own reputation and legacy.

JERUSALEM WATCHMAN (03/20/06):
The Dangerous Dreams of Jimmy Carter

Would that this Georgian peanut farmer’s ability to damage and weaken Israel had been limited to the single term he enjoyed in the White House between 1977 and 1981. Tragically for the people of our region, it has not.

YAHOO ANSWERS:
Is Jimmy Carter Anti-American?...Anti-Semitic?

Use the link below and decide for yourself:
Click Here

HENRY KISSINGER:
“The Carter administration has managed the extraordinary feat of having, at one and the same time, the worst relations with our allies, the worst relations with our adversaries, and the most serious upheavals in the developing world since the end of the Second World War."

NEWSMAX.COM (10/21/02):
Jimmy Carter, Traitor?

In the same month that Jimmy Carter was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, a new book reveals that Carter may be guilty of treason, based on newly unearthed Soviet documents...The facts show that, far from bringing peace, Carter has left a trail of disaster behind his long path.

Republicans reward wealth, not work says Nancy Pelosi

The Associated Press writer Andrew Taylor reports today:

The federal budget estimate for the fiscal year just completed dropped to $250 billion, congressional estimators said Friday, as the economy continues to fuel impressive tax revenues.

If Democrats win control in the Nov. 7 midterm elections and Pelosi takes the gavel as the first Madam Speaker in history, here's what she says will happen:

Bush-era tax cuts would have to be rolled back for those above "a certain level." She mentioned annual incomes of $250,000 or $300,000 a year and higher, and said tax rates for those individuals might revert to those of the Clinton era. Details will have to be worked out, she emphasized.

And then she makes a statement that tells you she is completely "loopy" (a favortie expression of the Culture Warrior Bill O'Reilly):

"We believe in the marketplace," Pelosi said of Democrats, then drew a contrast with Republicans. "They have only rewarded wealth, not work."

That's impossible to do since it takes work to CREATE wealth! Pelosi obviously lives in some kind of liberal la-la land.

Take the World Wealth Report for example:

WORLD WEALTH REPORT FINDS HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS INCREASINGLY EARN RATHER THAN INHERIT WEALTH (The 10th Anniversary Report from Merrill Lynch and Capgemini Also Finds Europeans Pay More to Live “The Good Life”)

NEW YORK, July 11 – High net worth individuals (HNWIs), people with net financial assets of at least US$1 million excluding their primary residence and consumables, are increasingly earning rather than inheriting their financial wealth, according to the 10th Anniversary edition of the World Wealth Report (“The Report”), which was released in June by Merrill Lynch (NYSE: MER) and Capgemini.

The Report found that while business ownership or the sale of a business is the primary source of wealth (37 percent) for the majority of the world’s HNWIs, income ranks second at 24 percent as the source of wealth, and inheritance rates third at 18 percent. In previous reports, inherited wealth accounted for more of HNWIs’ assets than it does today. In fact, as recently as 2001 inheritance represented 21 percent of the source of wealth of Americans and 37 percent of Europeans.

“Clearly, earned wealth has grown faster than wealth passed down from an earlier generation,” said Bertrand Lavayssière, Managing Director, Global Financial Services, Capgemini. “It’s also clear that, with just 10 percent of their wealth coming from investment performance, HNWIs are very good at creating new wealth and are not simply relying on global economic prosperity and market performance to expand their financial holdings.” The trend is likely to continue.

Report findings show that in North America the largest share (32 percent) of HNWI wealth is from income versus business ownership (26 percent) and inheritance (16 percent).

However, in Europe business ownership or the sale of a business was clearly the top source of wealth at 50 percent, while income ranked at only 13 percent.

Meanwhile, Middle Eastern HNWIs derived the largest portion (32 percent) of their wealth through inheritance, while their counterparts in the Asia Pacific region became wealthy primarily through personal business and investment performance.
Cost of Living “The Good Life"

For a copy of the 2006 World Wealth Report, as well as more specific regional data, please visit www.capgemini.com/worldwealthreport.”

It's funny how Nancy mixed up the statistics for our country with those of the middle eastern countries: "Middle Eastern HNWIs derived the largest portion (32 percent) of their wealth through inheritance".

Here's what you'll really get if you help the Democrats get into office:

"We must share the benefits of our wealth" beyond the privileged few, she added.

Well, Nancy, guess what? There's only one way to do that and it's failed all over the world (remember the Soviet Union?). It's called COMMUNISM:

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

It's not so much that "communism" is a dirty word, it's just that it doesn't work.

The real truth about Muslims?

I recently received the following via email:

Muslims have stated that England will be the first country they take over.

These are pictures not shown on American TV or in American Newspapers (as they might help Bush's war on terror), but were forwarded to me by a Canadian Friend who thought Americans ought to know!

These pictures are of Muslims marching through the streets of London during their recent "Religion of Peace" demonstration:

Why would anyone think that we should be at war with such nice, peaceful Muslims!

Americans need to know.

*************************************************************************************
ALLAH IS DEAD

Written by Dr. Jack Wheeler
Tuesday, 19 September 2006

A careful reading of Pope Benedict XVI's speech on Faith and Reason, delivered at the University of Regensburg, Germany, on September 12 leaves one with the overwhelming impression of being in the presence of an absolutely world-class intelligence. I could not encourage you more to read and study it entire.

At root and on purpose, the speech is a devastating assault on the metaphysical foundation of Islam. It's become a commonplace to refer to our war with Islamofascism as a "War of Ideas." The war is now joined for real. The fight Benedict picked with Islam is exactly the fight we need. It is a fight in which Islam is defenseless.

This goes far beyond the Kafkaesque hypocrisy of Moslem barbarians threatening to kill the Pope for accusing Islam of being a religion of violence rather than peace. What Benedict really accused Islam of is being inhuman - because it's god, Allah, is inhuman.

In this speech, the Pope wiped away all the weepy touchy-feely "we all believe in the same God" claptrap. The Pope's fundamental point was the connection between mankind and the Christian God, and the lack of it with the god of Islam.

Register to read more...

Best business books of the year...every year

For over 25 years, Soundview Executive Book Summaries has provided busy business men and women with the most effective way to quickly and easily grasp the key points of today's most valuable business books. In minutes, you'll capture great ideas that will advance your career, boost company profits, and move your company ahead of your competition! Choose from many different formats, including print, on-line, PDF, MP3, and more. Subscribe today and receive 5 of their most popular business book summaries FREE (a $45 value)!

Washington Post Op-Ed Columnist slams Democrats

Washington Post Op-Ed Columnist Sebastian Mallaby opens with the following:

After years of single-party government, the prospect of a Democratic majority in the House ought to feel refreshing. But even with Republicans collapsing in a pile of sexual sleaze, I just can't get excited. Most Democrats in Congress seem bereft of ideas or the courage to stand up for them. They clearly want power, but they have no principles to guide their use of it.

A large part of his discussion is focused on the unfathomable refusal of the Democrats to discuss Social Security reform: "If today's Democratic leaders were even a little bit awake, they would realize that the case for Social Security reform has grown stronger since the Clinton era".

He then summarizes with this caveat about voting for the Democrats:

I'm not saying that Republicans are at all better, and of course elections breed some policy timidity. But the infuriating thing about the Democrats is that, just a decade ago, they knew how to empathize with voters' economic insecurities without collapsing into irresponsibility; they combined attractively progressive social policies with sensible pro-market fiscal responsibility. Now many in the party have lost interest in this necessary balance. If the Democrats win a measure of power next month, it's hard to see what they will do with it.

Read "A Party Without Principles"

97 Reasons Democrats Are Weak On Defense And Can't Be Trusted To Govern In Wartime

Today's Democrats are nothing like Presidents Roosevelt, Truman and Kennedy, who with courage and decisive action kept on top of their jobs and aggressively confronted one national defense crisis after another.

#1 starts, of course, with Jimmy Carter

#97 sums it all up:

When it comes to which party has proved more capable in acting to defend and protect Americans from foreign enemies, there is only one choice. From Johnson to Carter to Clinton, virtually all the defense policies and decisions made by Democratic administrations have been unsuccessful. And in many cases, they have unintentionally but materially increased the danger to our national security and the safety of all Americans.

There are 97 really important reasons to Read this INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY article!

The Dash

The grass is truly greener...

...is it Photoshop???