The Anthony Verdict

Since everyone else is weighing in on the Casey Anthony verdict, I may as well too. I should state that only in the closing days did I follow this case with any degree of attention. Did the verdict surprise me? Yes.

I agree with those who criticize the verdict and say that juries are leaning too much toward the CSI mentality. They want hard forensic and scientific evidence like DNA or fingerprints. Here they didn't have it. Nor were there any eyewitnesses. Nor could cause of death be established. This case rested mostly on circumstantial evidence. Yet defendants can, indeed, be convicted on circumstantial evidence. The strongest circumstantial evidence was the lies of Casey Anthony to her parents and to police in the wake of her daughter's disappearance, as well as her behavior while her daughter was missing. Indeed, she was convicted on four counts of lying to the police. The question begs; why did she lie to the police, and why did she lie to her parents.

Of course, who can believe what either one of those parents said? The whole family is a mess. Maybe that's what made the jurors throw up their hands in confusion-which leads to reasonable doubt. Yet, does it really make sense to argue that George Anthony-whatever his flaws are-a former cop -to come home to a drowned granddaughter in the swimming pool and decide to cover it up and conceal the body? C'mon! Who would cover up an accident to make it look like a crime?

Then you throw in the chloroform residue found in the trunk of Casey's car, the smell of decomposition in the trunk, and a hair from the trunk matching a hair found at the scene of the skeletal remains.

But what it keeps coming back to is Casey Anthony's lies and behavior while her daughter was missing. That brings it down to common sense, which the jurors seem to have forgotten.

So far, one alternate juror has spoken to the press, and he says he agrees with the verdict. He says George Anthony was hiding something. Probably so; a love affair, child molestation, which was never proven though alleged by the defense, who knows what else. Perhaps just a desire to protect his daughter from the consequences of what she did. Call me a cynic, but in all that crying George did on the stand, I never saw one actual tear. Ditto for Cindy Anthony.

The alternate juror says the prosecution did not prove motive (not required under the law). Didn't Casey Anthony's wild behavior while her daughter was missing demonstrate her motive-to be free and unburdened by her daughter? Is Casey Anthony psycologically disturbed? No doubt. Her behavior is beyond comprehension.

But to play devil's advocate, it is true that too many witnesses gave questionable testimony. It is also true that the investigation suffered a Dennis Fung (from the OJ Simpson trial) moment when that meter reader called in to cops that he had found bones in the swamp, and the cops failed to find them only to have the same person call again months later from the same spot, at which point they were recovered. That stinks, and when the prosecution has to contend with that kind of screw-up, their whole case is called into question by the jury.

It is a case with few if any heroes and one that will be second-guessed for years. It is also a case where justice will not be done. There is no one else for the police to investigate. Like the Simpson case, there is little left to do except decide whether to prosecute the parents for perjury and close the file.

Gaza Flotilla-Are US Laws Being Broken?

Greta Berlin

Once again, as we witness American activists (like Greta Berlin-above) engaging in action against a US ally (Israel) with this latest flotiilla to Gaza, isn't time that our vaunted Justice Department take a look at the US Code, specifically Title 18 USC 962?

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/718/usc_sec_18_00000962----000-.html

§ 962. Arming vessel against friendly nation


Whoever, within the United States, furnishes, fits out, arms, or attempts to furnish, fit out or arm, any vessel, with intent that such vessel shall be employed in the service of any foreign prince, or state, or of any colony, district, or people, to cruise, or commit hostilities against the subjects, citizens, or property of any foreign prince or state, or of any colony, district, or people with whom the United States is at peace; or


Whoever issues or delivers a commission within the United States for any vessel, to the intent that she may be so employed—


Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.


Every such vessel, her tackle, apparel, and furniture, together with all materials, arms, ammunition, and stores which may have been procured for the building and equipment thereof, shall be forfeited, one half to the use of the informer and the other half to the use of the United States.

What do you think? As Greta van Susteren would say, let's ask our expert legal panel.


"Uhhhh.....yeaaaah."

The second question is whether the current Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder would even enforce the law if it did apply. It seems to me clear that anti-Israel activists in the US are engaging in hostile action against a key US ally. They are attempting to conduct their own form of foreign affairs. The last flotilla resulted in violent resistance, indeed, physical assault against the Israeli troops attempting to board the Mavi Marmara. As a result, 8 persons were killed-fortunately all bad guys.

Is this the kind of action American citizens should be involved in against an American ally? In this case, they are attempting to break a naval blockade by Israel designed to keep weapons out of the hands of Hamas-a terrorist organization by our own designation. The Israelis have provided a reasonable method of delivery of legitimate humanitarian goods to Gaza through an authorized port subject to inspection. The activists reject this. Their purpose is to provoke a violent incident with Israel in their campaign of deligitimization.

It is time for the American government and the Justice Department to investigate whether these American activists are violating American law, and, if so, enforce the law.

While they are at it, they can investigate people like Brit George Galloway for coming to our shores and teaming up with other radicals like New York City politician Charles Barron in collecting and delivering funds to Hamas in Gaza.

Don't hold your breath.

Quote of the Week by Dick Durbin

Hat tip to CNS News

Speaking to a group of young people hoping to have their immigration status regularized by the DREAM Act in the Senate Tuesday, Senator Dick Durban (D-IL) told them this:



Er, Senator. You have to be born in this country to become president of the US. I think people born elsewhere who came here illegally are excluded.

"Uhhhhh.....yeaaaah."

That'll be DREAM Act 2.

A July 4 Reminder, Nigel Farage Lambasts Hermann Van Rompuy

In April, 2010, British member of the European Parliament Nigel Farage gave another of his regular spankings to EU president Hermann van Rompuy. Farage's message rings true for us on our day of independence.


Nigel Farage VS "Zeus" by CeluiParQuiVientLeScandal

Ain't independence grand?

One Fine Day in Dearborn

Hat tip to Jihad Watch
 
This video was posted July 3 on Jihad Watch. Video by David Wood.



Keep in mind, this is not Cairo. This is not Saudi Arabia. This is not Afghanistan.

This is in Dearborn, Michigan, USA.

Happy Independence Day.

Norman Finklestein's New "Book"

In May 2010, the great "independent scholar with a PhD from Princeton, Norman Finklestein, spoke at UC-Irvine during the annual Muslim Student Union anti-Israel week. Since being canned by DePaul University for being something less than a respected scholar, Finklestein's full-time job is traveling from one university to another to give speeches against Israel.

In the below tape, yours truly asked Finklestein to sign a letter from several dozen Jewish faculty members at UCI asking for an end to anti-Semitic hate speech on campus brought on by the above mentioned anti-Israel events. As you will see, Finklestein answered my request by going on a long dissertation about South African jurist Richard Goldstone, he of the infamous Goldstone Report on the Gaza fighting.

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/05/norm-finklestein-refuses-to-sign-letter.html


Aside from the fact that his answer had little to do with my request, Fiinklestein subsequently was chagrined to learn that Goldstone later recanted said report (which everybody knew was based on the Palestinian account and completely biased against Israel in the first place.)

So where does that leave Finklestein, given his high praise for Goldstone in May of 2010? It leaves him with his latest book, a 44-page "work" devoted to "unmasking" the "secret" of why Goldstone recanted.

http://www.orbooks.com/our-books/goldstone-recants/

(Ridiculously over-priced at $4.00)

"What can be said with certainty, and what Norman Finkelstein demonstrates in these pages, is that Goldstone did not change his mind because the facts compelled him to reconsider his original findings."

So if you have 4 bucks burning a hole in your pocket, drop into your favorite alternative book store and pick up a copy of Norman Finklestein's latest piece of crackpot theory about his former idol, Richard Goldstone. Pay an extra nickel and you can get a signed copy.

Rutgers and the University of California

                                                            "One person's hate speech is another person's education."



Stella Paul, writing in American Thinker, and Jerry Gordon, writing in New English Review, have focused on problems of anti-Semitism on the University of California campuses and, in the latter, Rutgers University in New Jersey. Paul takes UC President Mark Yudof to task for allowing the situation to fester, while Gordon draws comparisons between Rutgers and UC-Irvine (where I teach part-time).

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/07/jewish_university_presidents_who_abandon_jews.html

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/36244#CurDomainURL#/blog.cfm

Last November, I attended a speaking appearance by Yudof at Temple Bat Yahm in Newport Beach. Let us say that I was underwhelmed.


While Yudof was trying to explain to the audience why he couldn't do much about anti-Semitic speech at UCI, the honchos of the local OC Jewish Federation were hauling a young female photographer out of the room and giving her the third degree over who she was working for. (No, there was no physical force used, just rude treatment.)

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/11/uc-president-mark-yudof-speaks-in.html

The fact is that several UC campuses, in allowing themselves to be used as stages for radical, pro-Palestinian activism, have also allowed their campuses to become places of tension during their annual anti-Israel hate weeks. And it's not just other students who are making our campuses tense. Throw in left-wing, pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel professors-especially those indoctrinators who staff the Middle East studies departments-courtesy of Saudi petro-dollars, and what yoiu have is soimething less than what a university is supposed to be.

Speaking of Middle East studies radicals, how about that lovely woman at Rutgers, Shehnaz Sheik Abdeljaber? And she is an outreach coordinator for Middle Eastern studies??

                                                                                                          

"Zionist pig!!!"

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/04/zoa-to-rutgers-stop-campus-anti-semitism-israel-bashing-and-violent-threats.html

What makes the package complete are cowardly administrators; presidents, chancellors, vice chancellors, deans, asst. deans and silent professors who allow this situation to exist. The only thing that can change it is an outraged public, especially the local community and parents. It is high time for universities to get the message that ALL groups on campus are entitled to be treated in a civil manner. The sad fact is that Israel-Middle Eastern forums and events require campus police presence to insure no violence breaks out. That is a sad state of affairs for any university. It shouldn't have to be that way.

Why a Dutch Journalist Backed Out of the Flotilla

Hat tip to Gates of Vienna and Europe News (DK)

Below is an English translation of an original article in Dutch describing why one pro-Palestinian Dutch journalist backed off from the flotilla sailing to Gaza. The original Dutch version is also linked in this article.

http://europenews.dk/en/node/44949

This article is a perfect illustration of how gullible peace activists are being used by the radicals who are really behind this flotilla.

A Swedish/Israeli Report on the Gaza Flotilla

 "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Qur'an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope."  Muslim Brotherhood Creed



Mohammad Sawalha

Hat tip to Jihad i Malmo

The Swedish blog Jihad i Malmo has a report on who is behind this latest flotilla to Gaza. Does it come as any surpise that the Muslim Brotherhood is involved? The article has a link to a report by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs.

http://jihadimalmo.blogspot.com/2011/07/vem-ligger-bakom-den-nya-piratarmadan.html

"Den nya piratarmada som under namnet Ship to Gaza snart ska avsegla mot Gaza
är framförallt Muslimska Brödraskapets senaste krigsförklaring mot Israel och
Västvärlden.


Då Hamas 27 december 2008 utropade den Tredje Intifadan mot alla judar och alla
Israels vänner över hela världen, startade omedelbart Hamas moderorganisation,
Muslimska Brödraskapet, "Intifadan" över hela Europa.


Nu bevisar ännu en gång Brödraskapet att de och Hamas är två skott på samma ruttna stam...."


"The new pirate armada, which will soon sail to Gaza under the name "Ship to Gaza", is first and foremost the Muslim Brotherhood's latest declaration of war against Israel and the Western World.
 
Since Hamas on 27 December 2008 declared the Third Intifada against all Jews and all of Israels' friends, Hamas' mother organization, the Muslim Brotherhood, directly  began "intifada" over all of Europe.
 
Now it is proven yet again that Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood are two sprouts from the same rotten stem...."
 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In case you are wondering, this is the same Muslim Brotherhood that the Obama administration announced this week that they are recognizing and will do business with. Coincidentally, it has also been reported this week that our own ICE has placed Israel on a list of nations that sponsor terrorism.
 
Make no mistake. No matter how moderate the MB professes to be, they are dedicated to...
 
1 destroying Israel
 
2 bringing about a worldwide Islamic caliphate under shariah law
 
3  destroying the US by "destroying its own rotten house from within." That quote comes from an MB document seized in the US and introduced as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas.

And Muhammad Sawalha? Here is what Harry's Place (UK) has to say about the UK-based Hamas/MB figure:

http://hurryupharry.org/2010/03/14/the-guardian-muhammad-sawalha-leads-%E2%80%9Canti-racist%E2%80%9D-group/

This second flotilla is no peaceful group.

Gaza Flotilla Stalled in Greece

Finally some good news emerges from Greece. The Greeks have finally done something right. They have arrested a ship captain trying to join  the Gaza flotilla. Fox News has the happy news.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2011/07/02/greece-arrests-gaza-bound-boat-captain/?test=latestnews

Must be part of the new austerity measures being implemented in Greece. What audacity!

Now come charges that the Israelis are sabotaging flotilla ships before they set sail. That brings to mind that funny story last year about the Israeli shark that was eating tourists off the Egyptian coast.


"It's those damn Jaws again."

In all seriousness, that might be a smart alternative to having to board those ships and be met with deadly assaults from the "peaceful activists" like last time.

As yet, there are other ships that plan to sail and break the Israeli blockade. No amount of sensible arguments from any government can break their determination. Here's one passenger, activist Greta Berlin from San Francisco.

I haven't heard whether George "Lady in Red" Galloway is on board this time.

Or maybe that great "independent scholar with a PhD from Princeton", Norman Finklestein.

Ahh...so many interesting scenarios.

"Fire torpedo one!"

Stay tuned.

Rutgers-The Case for Community Involvement Against Anti-Semitism

Rutgers University, like many other universities in North America, has seen more than its share of anti-Israel activism that has spilled over into anti-Semitism.

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/01/statement-by-rutgers-university-on-anti.html

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/02/stand-with-us-and-hillel-statements.html

http://www.dailytargum.com/opinions/fight-anti-semitic-thought-speech-1.2447129

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/04/zoa-to-rutgers-stop-campus-anti-semitism-israel-bashing-and-violent-threats.html

(As to the last link, one can only ask, "Who in the Hell is this woman Shehnaz Sheik Abdeljaber?" Just another typical Middle East Studies "outreach coordinator".)

The below article tells how the local Jewish community has decided to get involved. What is also interesting is that Hillel has taken an active role. What the case of Rutgers illustrates is that there is an important role for the community-not just Jewish-but all good-minded people to answer the call. Is there a lesson for other schools? You bet there is.

http://jewishresearch.org/quad/06-11/pages/rutgers-hillel-celebrates-successes.htm


In the case of my school (UC-Irvine), Hillel has responded by supporting positive events like I-Fest. In my view, however, that is not enough. Whether or not Jewish (or other) students want to actively challenge the organizations like the Muslim Student Association or Students for Justice in Palestine is a personal matter, and only the individual student can make that decision. The fact is that in most campus communities, there is a void left when it comes to challenging the above groups, their speakers and their often hateful messages.

That is where the community comes in. The case of Rutgers, as well as UCI in the past couple of years illustrates that community involvement can be effective. For one thing, lax university administrators who are afraid to speak out and condemn anti-Semitic hate speech (as opposed to hate speech directed at certain other groups) have to have their feet held to the fire and told that ALL hate speech is unacceptable-even if constitutionally protected free speech. Over the years at UCI many hateful statements have been made against Jews. Swastikas have been scrawled on bathroom stalls at other UC campuses like Berkeley.
It was only in 2010, when Amir Abdel Malik Ali told Jews in his audience that he supported Hamas, Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad and that "You Jews-You'all the new Nazis" that UCI chancellor Drake finally spoke out and condemned it-without mentioning the speaker, the quote, the event and the targeted group.

Even worse, Orange County community members who decided after the incident with the Israeli ambassador to the US in February 2010 that enough was enough and started to organize counter-protests on the UCI campus, were met by opposition from the local Hillel chapter and the OC Jewish Federation. If some students prefer to dialogue with their Muslim counterparts, that is their business. If others (students or community members) choose to actively challenge hateful speakers in a legal and non-disruptive manner, that is our business.

Update on the Orange County Board of Supervisors Vote to Fund the OC Human Rights Commission

I have been contacted by both Orange County (CA) supervisors Bill Campbell and John Moorlach regarding the controversial vote to re-fund the OC Human Relations Commission, which had stated on their website that the BoS had voted unanimously to fund them for the full $302,000.

http://www.ocsd.org/ocgov/Info%20OC/Departments%20&%20Agencies/OC%20Human%20Relations/About%20Us/OC%20Human%20Relations%20Commission

"On June 14, 2011, at the OC Board of Supervisors Budget Hearing, by a unanimous vote,  the Supervisors, approved the OC Human Relations Commission’s full allocation of $302,000 for FY 2011-12."


Based on the above report, I posted an article criticizing Supervisor John Moorlach for voting "yes" when it was expected he would oppose further funding.

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2011/06/oc-board-of-directors-unanimously.html

Subsequently, I received an e-mail from Mr Moorlach informing me that my post might be in error since the vote was not unaminous. No further details were provided. At the same time, I e-mailed Board Chairman Bill Campbell asking for a clarification on the vote. Below is what I received.

"Gary:



The vote was 4 to 1 for funding OCHRC $302,000. The no vote was from


John Moorlach who said he would only vote for a $200,000 contract.


Thx for writing. Have a Happy 4th of July.


Bill Campbell"

So, 5-0, 2-1-1 with one abstention? I'll accept the 4-1 explanation from Campbell. So it appears that John Moorlach voted "no" after saying he would vote "yes" if the amount was $200,000.

That means I owe a partial retraction to Supervisor Moorlach. It appears he actually voted "no". Yet, I am disappointed that he was willing to approve $200,000 for this useless organization.

But what is the explanation for the above report on the OCHRC website that the vote was unanimous in their favor for the full $302,000 funding? That is apparently false.

Care to comment, Mr. Kennedy?