COUNTERCOLUMN: All Your Bias Are Belong to Us

Ace of Spades, call your office.

Roger Lee Nance, of 1117 Shew Ridge Mission Road, was charged with possession of non-tax paid liquor, possession of non-tax-paid liquor for the purpose of selling, and possession of equipment and ingredients intended for the use in the manufacture of an alcoholic beverage.
“This is one of the biggest seizures of white liquor I’ve seen come out of the mountains in my career,” ALE Director John Ledford said in statement.
The arrest follows a two-month investigation by ALE agents, assisted by the state Highway Patrol. In addition to the liquor, large amounts of sugar and other items were seized during a search of Nance's property, authorities said.

You'd better stay away from Copperhead Road

Labels: Crime, law, Music, Steve Earle

In a landmark expansion of civil rights for individuals with disabilities, a Minnesota panel upholds the basic human right of children with autism to dress like common street whores.

Labels: children, disabilities, Humor, law

Remember when the leftards got the vapors when Colin Powell's office outed Valerie Plame to the press when they thought it was someone other than someone in Colin Powell's office?

Yeah, I remember that, too.

Now the ACLU is spying on CIA operatives outside their houses, and showing their photos to Al Qaeda operatives in Gitmo to identify these covert operatives by name so they can be subpoenaed.

When you get their fundraising envelope in the mail, send it back with no donation... just a copy of this article.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: ACLU, Gitmo, law, stupid, War on Terror

When it looked like the Achille Lauro terrorists were going to go free - terrorists who had only killed a handful of people, Ronald Reagan dispatched the U.S. Navy to intercept the airplane flying them home, over international waters, forced the plane down, and brought them to justice.

At 5:30 P.M. on Thursday, October 10, President Reagan was aboard Air Force One, returning to Washington, D.C. from a speaking engagement in the Chicago area, when word reached him that the terrorists were getting away. He authorized the carrier USS Saratoga, patrolling the Adriatic Sea, to put seven F-14 Tomcats into the air. Their orders: divert the Egyptian aircraft to a NATO base at Sigonella, Sicily. The appearance of the Tomcats unnerved the EgyptAir pilot, who compliantly altered course for Sicily. He had no way of knowing that the American "top guns" had orders to refrain from shooting down the 737 without direct instructions from the president.

Initially the Italians were not disposed to cooperate, scrambling their own warplanes to prevent a landing at Sigonella, but after a call from Reagan, Italy's Prime Minister Bettino Craxi gave permission to land. The American plan was to load the Palestinians onto a U.S. military aircraft and transport them to the States. But when American troops encircled the 737 they found themselves surrounded in turn by Italian soldiers. Italy had decided that since the Achille Lauro was an Italian vessel, the hijackers should be tried in Italian courts. The terrorists faced charges of premeditated murder, kidnapping and hijacking. When Reagan called Craxi this time, the Italian leader wouldn't budge -- Abul Abbas and his cronies would remain in Italian hands. After Arafat threatened *uncontrollable reactions" if the Italians turned Abbas over to the Americans, Italy refused a U.S. request to extradite the terrorist leader. Abbas was soon freed. In 1986 the four hijackers were convicted and sentenced to long prison terms,

The American public emphatically approved of the bold mid-flight interception of the Achille Lauro terrorists. Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak decorated the 737 pilot and demanded an apology from the United States. Reagan vowed he would never apologize.

When Scotland let the Lockerbie bomber go free - an ogre who murdered hundreds - Obama, the Apologist-in-Chief, dispatched a letter expressing "disappointment."

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: Great Britain, International relations, justice, law, Obama, Scotland, terrorism, War on Terror

According to an oh-so-unscientific Facebook poll, 93% of respondents say YES!!!

I say, BE CAREFUL!!!!!

This is an issue where conservatives should tread carefully. It's very easy to paint yourself into a corner here. For example, are we prepared to let children of casual pot-smokers starve because mom lit up a joint a week ago?

No?

Are we then willing to throw these kids into the foster system the moment mom shows up hot on a piss test to collect her food stamps benefits? Maybe for crack or cocaine, sure. But marijuana? Is breaking up the family ALWAYS going to be the best thing for the children?

No?

Then any conservative - or anyone else for that matter, who votes YES on this poll ought to be ready to give an answer: What are we going to do with food-stamp dependent children of casual pot users?

For drug users with no children? Hell with 'em. But for the ones with? Beware the law of unintended consequences.

Yes, I realize you need to pass a drug test to get a lot of jobs. But if I tested hot on a drug test, my prospective private-sector employer is just gong to deny me the job. Not break up my family.

Go VERY slowly here... and don't let politicians or anyone else demagogue this issue.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: children, Crime, culture, drugs, law

If you're considering the CIA as a career, I'd stop considering it for a while - at least until this wrecking ball of an administration is turned out of office.

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has a reliable ally in this Administration. The guys we asked to get information out of him to save thousands of other lives? Better get a good lawyer.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: CIA, Intelligence, justice, law, Obama, War on Terror

The Service Employees International Union has, amazingly, released a statement claiming that their thugs didn't attack a tea-party-style protester, but it was the tea-party protesters who attacked them!

St. Louis - Today, the SEIU Missouri State Council released the statement of Executive Director Brandon Davis:

"Last night, in St. Louis, a Reverend and SEIU member was assaulted at a town hall dedicated to discussing our national healthcare crisis. The incident, along with a town hall in Tampa, Florida, has been all over the radio and cable news shows. GOP operatives are rushing to paint it as SEIU thug violence. That couldn't be further from the truth.

"In fact, the Reverend, a St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter, and others who attended in hopes of a peaceful dialogue about our nation's healthcare crisis, endured the latest attempt by right-wing fringe groups to hijack the democratic process through violence if necessary. Last night, the Teabaggers' violent tactics broke and dislocated the shoulder of the Reverend.

Most tellingly, the SEIU has already produced a video attacking what their juvenile press office refers to as 'teabaggers.'

Watcb tbe vid at the Michelle Malkin link. Watch the end closely. It shows an SEIU member on the ground. The audio continues, though, with a witness yelling "you attacked him" after the video fades to black.

Why?

What are they trying to conceal?

"You attacked him for no reason!"
"He attacked America!"

Here's an idea:

You could cease patronizing SEIU establishments, but that signal is pretty indirect and tough to do in some areas. If you must visit an SEIU establishment, don't tip SEIU employees. Instead, hand them a note telling them exactly why you're not tipping them, and what union leadership has to do to restore them in good graces: retract this press release, apologize to Kenneth Gladney, and cease sending goons to intimidate Americans.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: culture, health care, labor, law, public relations

The Obama administration, parting with years of practice under Bush, folds like a cheap tent.

Labels: Al Qaeda, law, Obama, stupid, War on Terror

This one with a South Florida connection: A Navy commander has filed a complaint with the Miami Herald over reporter Carol Rosenberg's offensive and degrading behavior and questioning.



Full complaint here.

I don't know if he would have much standing, since they don't have the same employers. And I don't like the precedent of government officials suing newspapers for allowing their reporters to create a hostile work environment. Still, if she is interfering with the AP photographer's work, and publicly inferring that the Navy officer is gay - knowing that if the reputation stuck, he would lose his career, Rosenberg comes extremely close to committing a couple of torts.

If these reports are true - and there are apparently lots of witnesses, Rosenberg is sullying the Miami Herald brand. Her reporting is not to be trusted. She seems to have come unglued. She should be fired. It's not like there aren't good, underemployed journalists out there to replace her with.

Way to cultivate your sources, moron!

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: culture, journalism, law, Miami Herald, Navy, Sex, stupid, The media

The Clintons complained about them when they held the highest office in the land.

If they were wrong then, then aren't they even more wrong when aimed at a private citizen?

Supporters of Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor are quietly targeting the Connecticut firefighter who's at the center of Sotomayor's most controversial ruling.

On the eve of Sotomayor's Senate confirmation hearing, her advocates have been urging journalists to scrutinize what one called the "troubled and litigious work history" of firefighter Frank Ricci.

What a bunch of drooling jackals Democrats are.

Sotomayor can't stand on the merits, so they target a firefighter Sotomayor ruled against... and for which Sotomayor was smacked around by the Supreme Court.

Why? Because Ricci was right.

People for the American Way, which, by the way, has America-hating actor Alec Baldwin on its board of directors, has become a gang of character-assassin thugs.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: law, People for the American Way, Politics, Sotomayor, supreme court, The Left

From the A.P.

BEAUMONT — Relatives of a slain sailor are calling the 29-year-old’s death a hate crime.
Rose Roy of Beaumont said her nephew, Navy Seaman August Provost III, had complained a year before about being harassed for being gay.
Roy said she advised Provost to report and document the incidents, but she said the military did little to help.
“He went to the Navy to serve and protect,” she said in an interview with Beaumont’s KFDM News, “he didn’t get protected at all.”
Roy told The Associated Press that the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy discouraged her nephew from asking for help.

What did I tell you? What the fuck did I tell you five years ago? Yeah, I called it. And for calling it exactly like it was, I got accused, at the time, of penning "homophobic rant."*

At any rate, the conclusion that the DADT policy is to blame is utter hogwash. That's not the military's policy that discouraged her nephew from asking for help. It is the UCMJ, which is the law of the land. The military has zero choice in the matter, and absent a change in the law, approved by Congress, Provost would have been in the exact same predicament had DADT never been enacted.

I get pretty tired of dumbass reporters getting led around by their noses.

The 29-year-old Houston native was found dead Tuesday at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, north of San Diego. Roy said the family was told that Provost was shot three times, had his hands and feet bound, his mouth gagged, and body burned.

Just terrible. But that problem is a hell of a lot bigger than DADT. Indeed, had the military still had a blanket ban on gays serving, August Provost would probably still be alive today.

Democratic Rep. Bob Filner of San Diego said Thursday he wants a Defense Department investigation into the death, after leaders of the city’s gay community asked him to intervene.
Investigators have called the sailor’s death a random act unrelated to his sexuality and have taken a “person of interest” into custody. Inside sources describe possible suspects as a construction worker, a police officer, a cowboy, and an Indian chief. No charges have been filed.

I'm taking some liberties with the last part.

Incidentally, although the Navy Department has long had a 'witch-hunt' culture, to my eye, there is no reason why a commander needs to take a complaint over sexual harrassment as an admission of homosexuality, leading to a discharge. It is entirely possible to investigate the harrassment without looking into homosexual conduct itself.

I haven't been directly confronted with the issue. I've had troops who I'm reasonably sure were gay, but I didn't care, had no reason to look into it, had other things to worry about, and it wasn't a problem in the unit. I suppose had I heard the first rumblings of any kind of harrassment problem, I could have let the word out through my First Sergeant that I would not condone or permit a hostile work environment for ANY reason, and that furthermore I would consider any male on male harrassment of any soldier on the basis of homosexuality to be a tacet admission of homosexual interest on the part of the harrasser, and simply proceed with discharge papers.

**See also this reaction by Bill Cameron

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: Army, culture, gays, law, Politics, soldiers' issues, The media, UCMJ

No surprise. Really, the only suprise to me is that it was even close.

What's more, as PowerLine observes, when Sotomayor issued her ruling, she devoted only one paragraph to the merits of the case. Says Paul Mirengoff:

But this much is clear: the Court devoted 93 pages to a matter that Judge Sotomayor tried to dispose of in a summary order. Moreover, according to Ed Whelan, not a single Justice thought that Judge Sotomayor acted correctly in granting summary judgment for the City of New Haven.

In other words, Sotomayor didn't even put forth a minimal effort to understand the merits and build a case for her conclusions, based on precedent and law.

Congratulations, Mr. President. You've appointed a divisive racialist and racist who got her biggest case exactly wrong.

Good going.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: human resources, law, race, Sotomayor, supreme court

The Thomas More Law Center files a Friend of the Court Brief opposing the ACLU.

At issue is a small cross originally erected on Sunrise Rock in 1934 by the Veterans of Foreign Wars in memory of the dead of all wars. The cross is located in California’s Mojave Desert, in a remote area where the only visible signs of human activity are off-road vehicles and trail hikers. The ACLU succeeded in its anti-cross agenda by obtaining a ruling in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals holding that the cross violated the so-called separation of church and state. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case, Ken Salazar v. Frank Buono.

I swear - the ACLU isn't staffed by liberals so much as sociopaths.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: ACLU, Christianity, in memoriam, law, Religion, soldiers' issues, stupid, The Left

I hate Illinois Federalists.

Illinois has not abolished self-defense and has not expressed a preference for long guns over handguns. But the municipalities can, and do, stress another of the themes in the debate over incorporation of the Bill of Rights: That the Constitution establishes a federal republic where local differences are to be cherished as elements of liberty rather than extirpated in order to produce a single, nationally applicable rule.

Damn your inalienable, God-given, natural right to life and liberty. We got teh federalism to uphold! (That's the Chicago Way.)

Federalism is an older and more deeply rooted tradition than is a right to carry any particular kind of weapon.

Ok... anyone who can write that crap with a straight face has spent entirely too long in law school.

Not only that, but they have their heads up their asses and don't know history.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: Althouse, Crime, law

A grain dealer is personally tortured by a member of the UAE royal family and a police officer. Caught on tape.


And these are the moderates.

At least he didn't put a panty on the man's head.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: Arabs, International relations, law, Middle East, torture, UAE

So says one of their own:

"The French and the Americans will regret starting this killing. We do not kill, but take only ransom. We shall do something to anyone we see as French or American from now," Hussein, a pirate, told Reuters by satellite phone.

Here's one of my takeaways from Machiavelli: Men avenge small offenses. But they cannot avenge large ones.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: law, Navy, pirates, War on Terror, Warfighting

Justice Ginsburg advocates the citing of foreign law in American jurisprudence.

Amazingly, she can't even figure out why it's controversial.

“I frankly don’t understand all the brouhaha lately from Congress and even from some of my colleagues about referring to foreign law,” Justice Ginsburg said in her comments on Friday.

The court’s more conservative members — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas — oppose the citation of foreign law in constitutional cases.

“If we’re relying on a decision from a German judge about what our Constitution means, no president accountable to the people appointed that judge and no Senate accountable to the people confirmed that judge,” Chief Justice Roberts said at his confirmation hearing. “And yet he’s playing a role in shaping the law that binds the people in this country.”

Justice Ginsburg said the controversy was based on the misunderstanding that citing a foreign precedent means the court considers itself bound by foreign law as opposed to merely being influenced by such power as its reasoning holds.

“Why shouldn’t we look to the wisdom of a judge from abroad with at least as much ease as we would read a law review article written by a professor?” she asked.

She added that the failure to engage foreign decisions had resulted in diminished influence for the United States Supreme Court.

That's retarded. Who gives a crap if the USSC is not cited in foreign cases? The USSC and Constitution represent the supreme law of the land. That is all the influence needed.

Ginsburg Shares Views on Influence of Foreign Law on Her Court, and Vice Versa
E-Mail
Send To Phone
Print
Reprints
ShareClose
LinkedinDiggFacebookMixxMy SpaceYahoo! BuzzPermalinkBy ADAM LIPTAK
Published: April 11, 2009
COLUMBUS, Ohio — In wide-ranging remarks here, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg defended the use of foreign law by American judges, suggested that torture should not be used even when it might yield important information and reflected on her role as the Supreme Court’s only female justice. The occasion was a symposium at the Moritz College of Law at Ohio State University honoring her 15 years on the court.

Skip to next paragraph

Kiichiro Sato/Associated Press
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday at Ohio State University, where she talked freely about her work, past and present.

Related
Times Topics: Ruth Bader Ginsburg“I frankly don’t understand all the brouhaha lately from Congress and even from some of my colleagues about referring to foreign law,” Justice Ginsburg said in her comments on Friday.

The court’s more conservative members — Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Samuel A. Alito Jr., Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas — oppose the citation of foreign law in constitutional cases.

“If we’re relying on a decision from a German judge about what our Constitution means, no president accountable to the people appointed that judge and no Senate accountable to the people confirmed that judge,” Chief Justice Roberts said at his confirmation hearing. “And yet he’s playing a role in shaping the law that binds the people in this country.”

Justice Ginsburg said the controversy was based on the misunderstanding that citing a foreign precedent means the court considers itself bound by foreign law as opposed to merely being influenced by such power as its reasoning holds.

“Why shouldn’t we look to the wisdom of a judge from abroad with at least as much ease as we would read a law review article written by a professor?” she asked.

She added that the failure to engage foreign decisions had resulted in diminished influence for the United States Supreme Court.

The Canadian Supreme Court, she said, is “probably cited more widely abroad than the U.S. Supreme Court.” There is one reason for that, she said: “You will not be listened to if you don’t listen to others.”

Fine. Go be a Canadian judge, Justice Ginsburg.

American hostility to the consideration of foreign law, she said, “is a passing phase.” She predicted that “we will go back to where we were in the early 19th century when there was no question that it was appropriate to refer to decisions of other courts.”

No, dumbass. It's not a passing phase. The reason we cited other courts in the early 19th century is because we had not yet developed over 200 years of case law of our own, grounded specifically in our constitution, and therefore had no choice but to resort to other legal traditions - specifically English common law - for guidance in interpreting U.S. law.

That is no longer the case.

Our hostility to foreign law cited in American jurisprudence is no passing phase. It is part and parcel of American exceptionalism.

Of course, if you're a numbskull libtard, you think that America is not exceptional at all.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: law, supreme court, The Left

We're finally getting serious with these pirates: The FBI is now investigating some of these guys, raising the spectre of possibly filing federal charges against the Marsk hijackers if any of them are taken alive.

Indeed, speaking in the hypothetical, of course, the Attorney General is now saying that if an American were harmed I'm sure they're quaking in their sandals.

Meanwhile, the FBI is treating the ship as a 'crime scene.'

Good idea. Taka a multi-million dollar ship and its cargo out of circulation for weeks while we wait for federal bureaucrats to complete their investigation.

The Obama Administration: Tough. Strong. Bold.

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: law, Navy, Obama, pirates, stupid

...and I did not speak out, for I was not into granny porn.

Labels: culture, law, Sex, stupid

An old friend sends me this piece on the old "White Phosphorus Is Used Against Civilians" chestnut written by Juliet Lapidos over at Slate:

Actually, though it's obvious the reporter does better than a lot of folks in reporting the issue, the two hours she spent reporting this piece wasn't enough to make up for her utter lack of background knowledge on the topic.

As a result, she can't tell shit from shinola when assessing her source documents, and therefore seems to place the idiotic allegations of Human Rights Watch at the same level with military doctrine and the Law of Land Warfare and the long experience of fire support experts.

Finally, she falls flat on her face with this passage:

White phosphorus has an iffy legal status.

No, dumbass. It doesn't. It's perfectly legal to use on the battlefield. As you yourself note:

No treaty bans the use of white phosphorus against strictly military targets, although there is a debate over whether it ought to be classified as a chemical weapon and prohibited under the Chemical Weapons Convention.

Yes. The debate is between sober, informed people who understand the munition and its uses on the battlefield on one hand, and ignorant morons on the other. Your problem, Julia, is that you still can't tell the difference.

Protocol III of the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons outlaws the use of "incendiary weapons" on civilians or on military targets located within a concentration of civilians. The protocol, however, specifically excludes munitions that "may have incidental incendiary effects, such as illuminants, tracers, smoke or signaling systems."

And herein you falsify your own assertion. White Phosphorus, as used by U.S. and Israeli forces in the smoke/signal/illumination role, is exempt from the convention.

Why?

Because on the urban battlefield, white phosphorus saves lives, you dolt!

Splash, out

Jason

Labels: Iraq, Israel, law, Media, soldiers' issues, The Left, The media, Warfighting