Tuesday, June 30, 2015
Marilyn Mosby Guilty of What She Seeks to Condemn
Blacks in government have an appalling record -- even before Obama came along
I ask you quite sincerely, What is the moral difference between racially motivated abuses of power by rogue municipal police officers and those by prosecuting attorneys?
People should be concerned by Baltimore City State's Attorney Marilyn Mosby's behavior, but it is especially alarming when you consider that she is engaging in the same type of behavior that she is using her state power to criminalize.
We can now see why Mosby played hide the ball with the autopsy report on Freddie Gray's death, and it certainly wasn't to protect anyone's privacy — except, perhaps, her own, because it is objectively damning to her politically driven prosecution.
I have always been a law-and-order type of person and a strong supporter of law enforcement officials. In my book, cops don't receive nearly the credit and respect they deserve for helping to keep the peace, protect the citizenry and preserve ordered liberty. Over the years, I have observed how the political left has frequently abused, undermined and denigrated law enforcement, presumably because to many leftists, cops symbolize the Man — the existing power structure that represents the form of government they resent. It's ironic that these same leftists still target law enforcement when they are now largely in control of government and have managed to fundamentally change so much about our government that it ought to be to their liking.
Despite my respect for law enforcement, I must also point out that I am equally passionate against those situations in which cops — or any other governmental officials — go rogue and abuse their authority. It is horrifying when people vested with official authority abuse their authority under color of law. And when cops cross that line, they must be brought to justice, without question.
But it's wrong to evaluate allegations of abuse through biased lenses. You don't assume cops are acting improperly just because you are prejudiced against cops or authority. You must assess each individual case on its own merits.
It was obvious at the time Mosby threw the book at these six officers that she had rushed to judgment and that she was primarily motivated not by justice but by political and emotional considerations, including a desire to punish cops for what she apparently believes are institutional wrongs. Why else would she attend anti-cop events? Why else would she appeal to the protesters and promise them justice?
As a state's attorney, Mosby doesn't have the luxury of viewing these incidents through a racial prism because of her own feelings or her desire to satiate a lynch mob. She has a fiduciary duty to weigh the evidence impartially. For her to use her power to overcharge these law enforcement officials was to extend the mob violence and mayhem of the protesters from the streets into the halls of justice, and it is despicable.
The just-leaked autopsy report reveals just how improper Mosby's charging decisions were. She already had to dismiss her absurd false imprisonment counts when the defense exposed that the knife Gray was carrying was not legal under Baltimore's city code as Mosby initially claimed and thus he was not arrested under false pretenses.
The report shows that Gray tested positive for "opiates and cannabinoid." Gray was out of control, verbally and physically active, yelling, banging and disorderly enough to cause the van to rock from the inside. His ultimately fatal injury is believed to have been caused by his crashing into the inside wall of the van when the vehicle rapidly reduced its speed at some point. This apparently led to paralysis in his arms and impeded his ability to breathe.
But here's the kicker. Had Gray remained in the prone position that officers had placed him in, he probably wouldn't have sustained the type of injury he did. Gray's standing up on his own, according to George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf, presented "a new and unexpected danger" that the police "could not have reasonably anticipated."
Banzhaf said it will be "very, very hard" for the state to prove the police officers had the state of mind required to prove the criminal charges against them. Let's just look at the most serious charge filed — that of depraved-heart murder in the second degree against Officer Caesar R. Goodson Jr., the driver of the van. Having a depraved heart means having a wanton indifference to the potential harm that could be caused, to the extent that the accused might as well have intended to kill the victim.
Who can look at the facts of the case that have come out so far and not conclude that this particular charge is over-the-top and unwarranted?
All the evidence will eventually come out, but from what we already know, Mosby's decision to file such serious charges, especially this one against Goodson, ought to give us all pause. With the stroke of a pen, she has gone a long way toward ruining this individual's life — even if he is eventually acquitted — not so that justice can be served but so the mob can be satisfied.
How is that any different from the alleged abuses she appears to be abusing her own power to pursue?
Library of Congress Promotes Gay Erotica Literature at Pride Month Event
The federally funded Library of Congress held an event to mark Gay Pride Month on Thursday to showcase the publication of literature focused on the homosexual lifestyle, including a gay man’s photography of nude male subjects and poetry by gays and lesbians about their homosexuality.
“We believe that GLBTQ literature is fundamental to the preservation of our culture and that LGBT lives are confirmed when our stories are written, published and read,” William Johnson, managing editor at the homosexual publishing company Lambda Literacy, said at the event.
A one-hour lecture was presented by Stathis Orphanos, a homosexual photographer whose “work celebrates the male body,” including nude photos of men and photo essays of military men in various states of dress, according to Orphanos and to a description of his work on a website that includes biographical information about gay and lesbian celebrity figures.
Three other publishers of homosexual literature were featured in a panel discussion, including Bryan Borland, who explained how he started his publishing house, which produces “Assaracus: A Journal of Gay Poetry.”
Borland explained that he started his journal after a homosexual mentor published some of his poetry in a journal called Ganymede, named for a mythical Greek figure. When John Stahle died, Borland said he wanted to continue his work but under a different title.
“My research showed me that in Greek mythology Ganymede had a bother Assaracus – his earthbound brother,” Borland said. “While Ganymede was swept up by Zeus’s eagle to serve at Zeus’ feet, there was Assaracus, and I thought what a perfect name for a journal of gay poetry.
“But I flipped it around a little bit -- I put an emphasis on the first syllable and changed the name to Assaracus, because I really wanted librarians across the country to have to say Assaracus, emphasize on a--,” said Borland, who publishes the journal and other gay literature with his homosexual partner through Sibling Rivalry Press. “You’ve got to make a little splash,” Borland said.
Another panelist was Lisa C. Moore, a lesbian who named her publishing company Redbone Press after the expression blacks use to describe her skin tone.
Included in the display set up at the event featuring Orphanos’ nude photography and Borland’s Assaracus was Moore’s anthology of stories by black lesbians “coming out.”
Moore’s book is dedicated Terri Jewell, “who lit a fire in my heart and under my butt and kept me going.”
“Actually, my mother realized I was a lesbian first and told my father, who told me,” Moore writes in the book’s introduction.
Moore said she first saw women acting like men when she moved to Atlanta. “I saw young black women passing as boys -- breasts bound, cigarettes in shirt pockets and pants hanging off their butts b-boy style,” Moore wrote. “It blew my mind.”
According the Congressional Budget Office, the Library of Congress’ mission is “to support the Congress in fulfilling its constitutional duties and to further the progress of knowledge and creativity for the benefit of the American people.”
The Library of Congress budget for fiscal year 2014 was $618.8 million, according to its website.
Brainwashed into racism by the Left
Ali Michael is a young writer for the Huffington Post. That’s bad enough in itself, but it gets even worse. You see, she’s a white lady who hates… whites. Herself included. As she explains in a recent piece about her views on race:
I definitely experienced this. There was a time in my 20s when everything I learned about the history of racism made me hate myself, my Whiteness, my ancestors… and my descendants. I remember deciding that I couldn’t have biological children because I didn’t want to propagate my privilege biologically.
If I was going to pass on my privilege, I wanted to pass it on to someone who doesn’t have racial privilege; so I planned to adopt. I disliked my Whiteness, but I disliked the Whiteness of other White people more. I felt like the way to really end racism was to feel guilty for it, and to make other White people feel guilty for it too. And then, like Dolezal, I wanted to take on Africanness. Living in South Africa during my junior year abroad, I lived with a Black family, wore my hair in head wraps, shaved my head. I didn’t want to be White, but if I had to be, I wanted to be White in a way that was different from other White people I knew. I wanted to be a special, different White person.
The nut extraordinaire goes on to explain that, after this period of intense hate, she concluded that it’s OK to be white… as long as you’re “the right sort of white.” What this means exactly isn’t clear, but it probably means you have to be a self-hating liberal WASP who feels guilty all day long about everything your ancestors may have done wrong — or not, since the majority of whites didn’t own slaves, of course, only a very small minority did. But hey, they could have had slaves, so that’s enough for little miss Ali.
Of course she conveniently forgets that many African slaves were sold to white slavers by their fellow Africans, but, you know, who cares about cold hard facts like that? Whiteness = evil. Black = good. Pure and simple.
All of that having been said, I won’t argue with her on her unwillingness to have children. One Ali Michael and one Rachel Dolezal are enough for the whole of mankind — whether they’d be black, yellow, red, or white.
Hypocrisy Alert: Female Marine Discharged for Bible Verse, but This Sikh Fella…
by LTC ALLEN WEST (US ARMY RET)
I'm a simple fella who doesn't like hypocrisy - especially when it's so very blatant. And when it happens, it's my duty to call it out, and so here we go once again. After all, I thought the liberal progressives were all about "fairness." So I just want someone to explain to me the fairness in this situation.
As reported by the Christian Science Monitor, "A US District Court judge ruled in favor of a Sikh student who sued the Army after being forced to choose between joining the ROTC and keeping his traditional turban, uncut hair, and beard. A federal court has ruled that Iknoor Singh, a Sikh college student at Hofstra University, will be permitted to enroll in the U.S. Army's Reserve Officer Training Corps without cutting his hair, shaving his beard, or removing his turban. U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson issued the ruling in Washington, D.C. on Friday, determining that Mr. Singh's adherence to his religion would not affect his ability to serve.
As a disclaimer, during my first duty assignment as a young lieutenant in Vicenza, Italy I had a mustache. That was 1984 and y'all remember there was an unwritten rule that officers didn't' have lip hair. I had it for that first assignment for a little while, but shaved it off because it was more important to comply with a standard - even an unwritten one. That's what service and individual sacrifice was all about.
Ok, hypocrisy alert! We recently shared with you all the story of a young black female Marine sergeant who was given a bad conduct discharge because she displayed "No weapon formed against me shall prosper" on her computer screen.
Her supervisor deemed the display of that piece of scripture from Isaiah 54:17 as being potentially offensive. And the U.S. Marine Corps stated she wasn't protected under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Yo, wazzup wit dat? Sorry, just having fun with a little Ebonics. So are we all so stupid not to see the hypocrisy of letting young Mr. Singh's religious beliefs supersede the Army's standards for appearance, yet the display of seven words from the Old Testament of the Bible be ruled offensive? I appreciate Mr. Singh's desire to serve our nation, but the objective of the U.S. military is that individuals conform to a unified standard of appearance - but perhaps that's no longer important.
Or could it be that everything is ok for other religious beliefs, just not for Christians?
Remember U.S. Air Force Major General Craig Olson who was attacked by little Mikey Weinstein of the Military Religious Freedom Foundation for speaking of his Christian faith and belief in God in uniform on the National Prayer Day? And we reported to y'all here about Weinstein forcing a nativity scene at GITMO in the chow hall to be taken down. But wearing a beard and turban due to one's religion is ok? So where is the fairness there, and why did the ACLU not step in to assist the Marine Sergeant? Ahh, she has the wrong religion it would seem. How many more instances are there of this blatant hypocrisy? Share with us those you've experienced.
I stay in touch with several Christian chaplains in the military and guess what, they must refrain from praying in the "name of Jesus." So in other words, a Christian chaplain cannot offer prayer in the name of the One for whom his faith is based. But Mr. Singh can have a turban and a beard because it's part of his religion.
Our troops are deployed to Islamic countries and even on our combat posts over there they're told not to openly display articles of the Christian faith - after all, we don't want to offend the folks we are over there to save from Islamic terrorists. So, Christian troops are encouraged not to display crosses and Bibles - but Mr. Singh can wear a turban and beard because it's part of his religion.
"Singh first requested a religious exemption from the military's grooming policies to enlist as an ROTC cadet in April 2013. His request was denied on the grounds that his exemption would have "an adverse impact on the Army's readiness, unit cohesion, standards, health, safety, or discipline." The Army then modified its decision, telling Singh he could seek an exemption but only after he was enlisted as a cadet. This meant he would have to go against his faith in order to be able to apply for an exemption. "I couldn't believe the military was asking me to make the impossible decision of choosing between the country I love and my faith," writes Singh in an ACLU blog post."
The hypocrisy is laughable because Mr. Singh, sadly, that's exactly what Christian men and women in our military are being TOLD to do. I guess being a Sikh makes you a protected class, good for you. We all know about the Air Force CMSGTwho was forced by his openly lesbian commander out of his duty position because due to his religious belief he did not belief in gay marriage. I suppose his Christian faith wasn't worth defending by the ACLU from undue command influence. Then again, believing that marriage is defined as a relationship between one man and one woman has somehow become a hate crime. It's sad, I guess some must make that hard decision of which Mr. Singh spoke Funny thing - we hear little from the liberal progressive socialist left about the religion that condemns gays and lesbians to death. I guess they're protected as well.
At some point in time this hypocrisy has to end and I don't care if I'm hated for pointing it out. Because if I am confronted with making a choice, well, I choose as Joshua did, per Joshua 24:14-15, (NIV):
"Now fear the Lord and serve him with all faithfulness. Throw away the gods your ancestors worshiped beyond the Euphrates River and in Egypt, and serve the Lord. But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your ancestors served beyond the Euphrates, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord."
Sadly, there is a focused movement by the secular humanist liberal leftists to punish those who make the choice of Joshua - then again, "No weapon forged against you will prevail, and you will refute every tongue that accuses you. This is the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and this is their vindication from me," declares the LORD" - Isaiah 54:17 (NIV).
Political correctness is most pervasive in universities and colleges but I rarely report the incidents concerned here as I have a separate blog for educational matters.
American "liberals" often deny being Leftists and say that they are very different from the Communist rulers of other countries. The only real difference, however, is how much power they have. In America, their power is limited by democracy. To see what they WOULD be like with more power, look at where they ARE already very powerful: in America's educational system -- particularly in the universities and colleges. They show there the same respect for free-speech and political diversity that Stalin did: None. So look to the colleges to see what the whole country would be like if "liberals" had their way. It would be a dictatorship.
For more postings from me, see TONGUE-TIED, GREENIE WATCH, EDUCATION WATCH INTERNATIONAL, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and DISSECTING LEFTISM. My Home Pages are here or here or here. Email me (John Ray) here.