About Me

Name: Arky51
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Blog Roll

 

WHY THE LEFT WON'T SAY "TERRORIST"

Regardless of the camp you are in, you can't help but be curious of why people like Theodore Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh, John Mohamed, Nidal Hasan - American Citizens – can commit such acts of mass mayhem and murder. People of Normal Sensibilities (IMO) cannot but look upon it in horror and call it what it is, an Act of a Terrorist.

Liberal/Progressives, as an identifiable Demographic, will readily decry the human tragedy in woundings and losses of life, and moan and mourn for the Victims, but they are loathe to call it Terrorism. They say they are searching and exploring for viable explanation, but, in reality they are looking for
“excuses.”

Daniel Zwerdling, of NPR reports, “Walter Reed Officials Asked: Was Hasan Psychotic?”  Promptly, then, he quotes a staffer at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, "Everybody felt that if you were deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, you would not want Nidal Hasan in your foxhole."

One official involved in the conversations had reportedly told colleagues that he worried that if Hasan deployed to Iraq or Afghanistan, he might leak secret military information to Islamic extremists. Another official reportedly wondered aloud to colleagues whether Hasan might be capable of committing fratricide, like the Muslim U.S. Army sergeant who, in 2003, killed two fellow soldiers and injured 14 others by setting off grenades at a base in Kuwait.

Still, the Liberal determination is that Nidal Hasan must be Mentally Ill or insane. He can't be held responsible!

The Washington Post reports:
As a senior-year psychiatric resident at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Maj. Nidal M. Hasan was supposed to make a presentation on a medical topic of his choosing as a culminating exercise of the residency program.  Instead, in late June 2007, he stood before his supervisors and about 25 other mental health staff members and lectured on Islam, suicide bombers and threats the military could encounter from Muslims conflicted about fighting in the Muslim countries of Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a copy of the presentation obtained by The Washington Post.

"It's getting harder and harder for Muslims in the service to morally justify being in a military that seems constantly engaged against fellow Muslims," he said in the presentation.

I believe I know precisely why the Liberal/Progressives refuse to call the acts of the Fort Hood Shooter (or anyone else, for that matter) Terrorism.

The Foundation, Basement, and Ground Floor of the Liberal/Progressive Movement is that the Entire World is the Victim of the United States of America.

Keyword: VICTIMSTANCE  -- the active mindset of being a victim.

So, what do we know about Victims? Victims are expected to be in Victimstance, a temporary state of Mental Disorder. Victims are expected to be angry. Victims are expected to be irrational. Victims are expected to be seeking vengeance. Victims can even be forgiven for acting outside the bounds of the law, in a court of law, on occasion.

If the Liberal/Progressive zealots can manage to keep their unenlightened adherents in that Irrational State of Victimstance, there are numerous other manipulations that may be easily be foisted upon them, one of the easier being “Hero Worship.  To levy blame upon anyone whom they deem to be a potential hero of the cause to be a definite spell breaker.


NPR Story: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=120313570&ps=rs
Washington Post Story: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2009/11/10/GA2009111000920.html

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"NO MERCY" JUSTICE?

HEADLINE TAMPA TRIBUNE, 9 November 2009,
100 U.S. Juveniles, Not Guilty of Murder, Get Life Without Parole
 
All are in the United States. And 77 of them are in Florida.
 
Not surprising to me. I am a born and bred Floridian.
Something less than True Justice is a long held Florida Tradition that has spawned such Supreme Court Rulings as Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), a landmark case in United States Supreme Court history, where the Court unanimously ruled that state courts are required under the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution to provide counsel in criminal cases for defendants who are unable to afford their own attorneys.

It was Florida which first implemented the Six Member Jury, in place of the established Twelve Member Jury. The argument was that "statistically" the fewer members equally represented the Public Sensibilities.

In fact, it is exponentially easier to obtain a unanimous decision from Six Members, than from Twelve .. .. .. and therefore exponentially easier to sway a Jury toward Conviction with scant evidence.
 

The increasingly free and easy judicial revision of Constitutional norms is strikingly exemplified by Williams v. Florida 399 US 78 (1970) , 1 wherein the Supreme Court, for the first time in our history, held that a 6-man jury satisfies the requirement of trial by jury. By Justice White’s own testimony a 12-man jury has been the invariable common law practice since “sometime in the 14th century” —600 years. The Court held in 1930 that “it is not open to question . . . that the jury should consist of twelve men, neither more nor less.” 2 But because history furnishes no explanation why the number 12 was chosen, Justice White dismisses it as “an historical accident, unrelated to the great purposes which gave rise to the jury in the first place.” 3 Adherence to a practice for 600 years renders its “accidental” origin irrelevant, for as Coke stated, “usage and ancient course maketh law” 4 —all the more when that usage is embodied with full awareness in a written Constitution. The case for the practical wisdom of 12 jurors has been made by Hans Zeisel, Leonard Levy and others,5 so I shall focus on Justice White’s extraordinary approach to constitutional interpretation.
 
Florida has also been notorious for their State Attorneys' practice of "Excluding and Secreting Favorable Evidence," in order to force an accused to accept a "Plea Bargain." so that the Fiscal Expenditure of a legal Trial may be avoided. Consider the late Eugene "Clean Gene" Whitworth. I was not there, so I cannot verify the report that, after his death the safe in his office was opened to reveal mitigating (and even exculpitory) evidence from cases his Office had prosecuted throughout his "illustrious" career.

Another important issue that Florida has been "called out" on, which has set Precedent and is still, nonetheless, ignored is Smith v. State, 95 So.2d 525 (Fla.1957), the Court stated (at p. 527):

“It is not the duty of a State Attorney merely to secure convictions; the State Attorney is required to represent the State, it is his duty to present all of the material facts known to him to the jury; and it is as much his duty to present facts within his knowledge which would be favorable to the defendant as it is to present those facts which are favorable to the State; being an arm of the court he is charged with the duty of assisting the Court to see that justice is done, and not to assume the role of persecutor,”
Justice without mercy is Tyranny,
Mercy without Justice is Weakness,
Pardon without Repentance is Foolishness.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A LESSON TO FOCUS UPON

I am just glad to see that money, for the first time in a long time, did not buy the votes in this off-season election.

There is a lesson here, for the Conservatives to to understand and treasure. Of particular note is the fact that Mr. Christie focused on particulars of how to deal with individual and specific problems in the State, rather than any Partisan Issues.

In the wake of President Obama's vagueries and now-proven-false promises, people are hungry to hear plans of action regarding how to overcome problems.

Is it funny how, just two days before the election, Obama was at a rally in New Jersey assuring voters that Corzine was ".. .. .. one of the best partners I have in the White House.” Assuring Democrats, “We work together. ... Jon Corzine helped get this done." Is is funny? You bet it is! While the White House is trying to spin these “upsets” as insignificant, we had better sit up and take note that genuine Conservatism, seeking to be honestly connected with the Constituencies, is what will bring the people to our side .. .. .. shoulder to shoulder.

Three things, that I see, hurt the Conservative side of issues:
-- RINOs – Republicans in name only, such as Arlen Specter, and Dede Scozzafava
-- Power Conservatives – or those who are conservative only of the Status Quo that confers upon them immunity from subjection to the Laws they bundle up for the shoulders of the “Common Folk.”
-- Members who vote the Party Line, but, because the Liberals get away with the abandonment of Ethics and Integrity, also allow theirs to slip.

A true Conservative is:
Fiscally Responsible [disdaining the obfuscation of “fuzzy math”]:

Socially conservative [subscribing unwavering to Concrete Moral Values];

Conservative in Faith [sure of his beliefs and why he believes them]

Conservative of the Constitution [without “extrapolating” and “rendering” obscure definitions that cannot be understood by those who do not speak legalese; and without regard to how it may benefit his “adversaries” or encumber the goals of those friendly to him];

Possessing inviolable Integrity of Patriotism which declares in his life, “With all of her problems, I will strive to ensure that America shall remain the most honorable and honored Nation on the Globe.”

Isn't it amazing to think that President John F. Kennedy would be looked down upon by his Party, today, for statements he made in his Inaugural Address?

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.
This much we pledge - and more.
To those old allies whose cultural and spiritual origins we share, we pledge the loyalty of faithful friends. United, there is little we cannot do in a host of cooperative ventures. Divided, there is little we can do - for we dare not meet a powerful challenge at odds and split asunder.

And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.
My fellow citizens of the world: ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

CHECKS AND BALANCES IN OUR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC

Only the House of Representatives may authorize expenditures from the National Treasury.

An ominous prognostication is attributed to Alexander Tytler, Lord Woodhouselee (15 October 1747 - 5 January 1813), a Scottish-born British lawyer and writer, “A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the Public Treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose Fiscal Policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.” [either Authoritarian or Totalitarian]

Three things I have continually tried to convince people of, in the five years or so I have been Blogging.
--
TANSTAAFL
- There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch! If you don't pay for it, somebody else did. Taking someone else's money without their permission is Theft!
--
Regardless
of which Party has the Majority in the House of Representatives, the President should be elected from a different Party.
--
At the outset of American Government, the Senate was populated by Statesmen and some Lawyers, and the House of Representatives was populated by Average Citizens - Shop Keepers, Small Business Owners, Farmers and Ranchers, even Educated Laborers - sent as Envoys from the areas where they lived - known and trusted. They were willing to do their duty, but, almost from Day One, they were anxious to go back Home.

Now, almost all have Degrees in Political Science, and most have acquired, additionally, Degrees in Law and Jurisprudence. Further, many have not long been residents of the District they run to represent, and some do not live in their Districts at all. They do not know their Constituents, and their Constituents do not know them. They want to be Career Politicians, and they naturally want to Rule rather than Serve.

What I am
saying is that the Judicial Branch has (for all intents and purposes) taken over the Legislative Branch, and it is thereby impossible for the Citizenry to expect or even hope that the Judicial Branch will check the Power of the Congress, nor that the Congress will check the Power of the Judicial Branch, nor that the President can check the Power of either .. .. .. in the face of that two-thirds disadvantage.


And, when all three Branches are controlled by the same Party, there can be no Reasonable Expectation that there is anything other than
ONE BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT in power. How then can we expect our needs and wills to be truly represented by a government so out of touch?
 
*This is my Inaugural Posting, and I want to thank Townhall for the opportunity.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »