Archive for April 27th, 2006

More Than 1,100 Sex Offenders Nabbed in Nationwide Roundup

Thursday, April 27th, 2006

Wow, that says a lot about the morality of our country, doesn’t it?

WASHINGTON – Authorities have captured the largest number of sex offenders ever nabbed in a single law enforcement effort, federal officials will announce Thursday.
Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and John F. Clark, director of the United States Marshals Service, will detail the results of Operation Falcon II, a seven-day nationwide fugitive roundup, during a press conference in Washington at 1:15 p.m. EDT. Among those arrested during Operation Falcon II were 1,102 violent sexual offenders. The operation was conducted from April 17 through April 23.
The “priority targets” arrested were fugitives wanted for committing sexual offenses and crimes of violence against women, children and the elderly, as well as unregistered convicted sex offenders, according to Justice Department officials.
Others arrested in Operation Falcon II were fugitive gang members and violent offenders wanted for homicide, kidnapping, robbery, burglary, carjacking, weapons offenses, and narcotics sales.
FOX News’ Mike Levine contributed to this report.

‘Jesus with erection’ ignites outrage

Thursday, April 27th, 2006

Hundreds of people were injured and the offices of a fringe university newspaper, the “Insurgent”, a publication at the University of Oregon, were burned as dissident Christians rioted over cartoons published in the newspaper. Several of the offending cartoons showed Jesus in an offensive manner. Cars were burned as rioters shouted “Death to Newspapers” and “Death to the South European Barn Swallow”. Reporters are not quite sure why the South European Barn Swallow was singled out, other than one rioter thought his cousin’s friend might have said that one may have recently worked at the “Insurgent” as a typesetter.
Oh wait, this didn’t actually happen…
I mean, yes, the “Insurgent”, a fringe newspaper at the University of Oregon, did print some very offensive cartoons of Jesus, in an convoluted attempt to draw some kind of connection between the Danish cartoons of mohammed and the freedom to print and say whatever they were trying to print and say. But as for the rioting Christians? The only place that happened was in my imagination.
Here’s the article:

A Catholic activist organization has written to Oregon’s governor and state lawmakers to protest a University of Oregon student newspaper for having published cartoons showing Jesus Christ naked and with an erection.
In its March edition, the Insurgent, an “alternative” student paper on the Eugene, Ore., campus printed 12 hand-drawn cartoons of Jesus as a response to rival paper the Commentator having published the controversial cartoons of Muhammad originally published in Europe that sparked Muslim riots worldwide. The Insurgent claimed it published the drawings to “provoke dialogue.”
William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said the university’s president, Dave Frohnmayer, had been unresponsive to complaints about the drawings, so he had written to the governor, every state legislators and the chancellor of the Oregon University System, among others.
“The March edition of the Insurgent … was one of the most obscene assaults on Christianity I have ever seen,” Donohue said in a statement. “To make sure that the persons I wrote to understand how vile this attack was, I sent a photocopy of the two most offensive graphics: one was a depiction of a naked Jesus on the cross with an erection; the other, titled ‘Resurrection,’ showed a naked Jesus kissing another naked man, both sporting erections.”
Donohue also says there were other depictions of Jesus on the cross that were “so gratuitously offensive that only the most depraved would defend them.” He also noted the paper published two commentaries attacking Catholicism.
“That all of this appeared in a student newspaper, during Lent, on the campus of a state institution, makes one wonder what is going on at the University of Oregon,” added Donohue.
While not describing the more sexual drawings, the main student newspaper at the university, the Oregon Daily Emerald, also criticized the Insurgent.
“The Insurgent editorial indicates a desire to show Americans why the original cartoons were so offensive to the Muslim world,” wrote the editor of the Emerald. “According to the editorial, ‘What is “not a big deal” in the US (sic) is apparently a humongous big deal to others. Why should we assume it would not be?’
“However, printing home-grown cartoons depicting Jesus on a cross/pogo stick or Jesus on a cross/hangliding apparatus are not inflammatory in the same manner as the anti-Islam cartoons, and therefore fail to produce the intended empathy from Christians to Muslims.”
Added the paper: “Unlike the Danish cartoons, the Insurgent drawings seem intended to simply incite controversy for controversy’s sake rather than making specific social commentaries.”
A spokesman for Frohnmayer contacted WorldNetDaily after press time to say that the university president had posted a statement regarding the controversy surrounding the cartoons:
“I share your concern about the offensive nature of the content contained within the publication.
“I understand why it may seem as if the University should have prevented publication or should take some action against those responsible for the publication. The Student Insurgent is not owned, controlled or published by the University of Oregon and is funded with student fees. Therefore, the University cannot exercise editorial control over its content.
“The best response to offensive speech often is more speech. … I am strongly opposed to speech that makes individuals feel that they or their beliefs are unwelcome or belittled, and I can assure you I will use all permissible means to respond to publications such as the recent Insurgent.”

Can Anyone Identify This Bank Note?

Thursday, April 27th, 2006

I came into possession of this bank note several years ago, but don’t know anything about it. Since the blogshere possesses the most intelligent and learned people in the world, I thought I would throw it out there and see if anyone can read it and tell me where it’s from. Thanks!

Plano School District Votes to Settle Christian Club’s Discrimination Suit

Thursday, April 27th, 2006

Another Victory for Jesus!!

(AgapePress) – As part of an effort to settle a discrimination lawsuit, a Dallas-area public school district has decided to stop discriminating against a student-led Christian club. The district’s move comes after the student group filed suit, asking a federal judge to tell school officials to stop discriminating against the Christian students’ religious club.
Earlier this year, a group of students at a middle school in the Plano Independent School District (PISD) asked administrators for permission to form a Christian club. The club, named SWAT or Students Witnessing Absolute Truth, was approved.
Eventually, however, school officials told the students their group could not receive official recognition or a staff sponsor because it is a religious club. Liberty Legal Institute, a Dallas-area based religious freedom defense group, filed suit on behalf of the members of SWAT after a description of their club was briefly removed from a listing of non-curricular clubs on the PISD website.
Seventh-grader Michael Shell, the Christian club’s founder, says he and his fellow members only want to be treated fairly. If he and the other Christian students on campus simply let school officials “throw us around,” he observes, “then they would get the idea that Christians are weak and they can’t do anything, and [that] this Jesus guy they talk about isn’t really important to them.”
Liberty Legal Institute attorney Hiram Sasser says the school has harmed the club by not allowing it to have a faculty or staff sponsor. Denial of adult sponsorship meant the student group could not have a bank account — a fact that created problems for the Christian club, particularly during its fundraising efforts.
“Here’s some kids that are engaged in a fundraiser now, trying to raise money for multiple sclerosis, to help battle that disease,” Sasser posits. “While all the other clubs get to have a school bank account, these kids just have to kind of run around with the money in their pocket in order to give it to the multiple sclerosis folks.”
The types of institutional impediments PISD officials were throwing in front of this Bible club were “just absolutely ludicrous,” the Liberty Legal attorney contends. And this kind of discrimination is not new to this district, Sasser notes, as the Plano school system has been sued in the past for refusing students permission to hand out religious-themed candy canes during the Christmas season.
PISD School Board trustees voted last Monday to respond to SWAT’s lawsuit by voting to offer the Christian group the same privileges extended to other student clubs as part of a formal settlement proposal, which offer also includes an award of $100 in damages to the Bible study group and its founder. The district would also agree to pay legal costs in the case but would admit no wrongdoing.

Networks’ Ad Campaign No Solution to Indecency Violations, Say Critics

Thursday, April 27th, 2006

It’s getting harder and harder these days to find television programs that are suitable for children. Aside from the filth the “big four” networks are producing these days, it seems that almost every other network has started showing:
1. Sexual suggestive content with teens as the characters.
2. Disfunctional families without dads or with dads whose only purpose is comic relief.
3. Commercials for lifestyle enhancement drugs.
4. Reality shows that, for the most part, aren’t reality at all.
5. The use of religious terms and language as swear words.
These are just some of the things that come to mind. The bottom line is that the networks will continue to spew trash until they are hit in their bottom line. They only understand the loss of revenue. Continue to “vote” your morals with your dollars and make sure they (the networks and advertisers) know are doing it.

(AgapePress) – Family-friendly media watchdogs say the television industry is merely trying to dodge its responsibility to police itself and its content. And the head of the FCC says the multi-million-dollar ad campaign just announced by the industry won’t be enough to satisfy his agency’s mandate to patrol the airwaves for indecency.
At their annual convention on Monday, the National Association of Broadcasters heard a pitch from the former head of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) about an upcoming ad campaign designed to inform parents about V-chip technology and television program ratings. “We want to tell parents that they, and they alone, have total power to control every hour of television programming,” said Jack Valenti in announcing the $330 million ad campaign.
Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council has his own translation of Valenti’s statement. The “avalanche” of ads, he says, is designed to persuade parents it is their sole responsibility to monitor what their children watch on TV. “In other words,” says the FRC president, “the MPAA wants to continue to pump out the sewage and make you [parents] responsible for the cleanup.”
“How noble. How empowering for you,” Perkins says tongue-in-cheek. “And how ridiculous.”
The announced ad campaign comes in the wake of a $3.6 million fine recently proposed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) against CBS for what the agency determined to be indecent programming, and the FCC’s decision to uphold another half-million-dollar fine against the network for the infamous “wardrobe malfunction” debacle during the 2004 Super Bowl halftime show. At the same time, the federal agency cited several TV programs — but did not fine the originating networks — for violating the standards for broadcasting indecent language. (See earlier article)
Since the FCC’s announcement in mid-March, the four major networks — ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox — have sued the FCC over the indecency rulings. The networks claim the FCC “overstepped its authority” in making rulings that are “unconstitutional and inconsistent with … previous FCC decisions.”
Some media watchdogs claim that lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt by the networks to obtain the right to indiscriminately broadcast foul language in violation of current law. One of those who feels that way is L. Brent Bozell of the Parents Television Council (PTC) — and he has a similar response to the ad campaign being promoted by Valenti and the MPAA. Bozell says his group’s research has shown that the V-chip and the ratings system — the core elements promoted by the ad campaign — have failed.
“We have found that most television programs airing foul language, violence, and inappropriate sexual dialogue do not use the appropriate descriptors that would warn parents about the presence of offensive content,” the PTC president notes. “Without accurate descriptors, the V-chip fails — and thus, the ratings system is rendered meaningless.”
According to Bozell, the only solution is for the industry to “clean up its act,” rather than to try to make the public more aware of technology and ratings that have been proven to be ineffective. The ad campaign, he asserts, will not solve the problem.
“They’re spending $300 million to defend themselves against their wretched excesses,” he says. “Why don’t they just stop airing their wretched excess?”
Someone else agrees with Bozell’s assessment of the multi-million-dollar advertising blitz — and that someone is Kevin Martin, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission. “I’m not sure that’s the complete answer,” Martin said of the campaign Tuesday in Las Vegas. He noted that live sports programming, such as the Super Bowl, is among the type of programs not rated.
In addition, Reuters reports, Martin observed that his agency’s research indicates that upwards of 40 percent of the TV sets in the U.S. do not have V-chips or other blocking technology. He believes that other initiatives — such as family-tier options or “a la carte” offerings by cable companies — would give consumers more choice. Consequently, parents would have more control over what they allow into their homes.