A federal judge has prohibited prayer at a Texas graduation ceremony.
So how does this fit into anyone’s idea of freedom of religion or speech?
What would Jefferson say? Five people arrested this weekend in D.C. for dancing at the Jefferson memorial monument.
A victory for freedom: The court has thrown out the ban on Christian leafleting in Dearborn, Michigan.
Tolerance in the Middle East: A provincial official in Algeria has ordered seven Christian churches to close.
In 2008 the government applied measures in accordance with Ordinance 06-03 to limit the activities of non-Muslim groups, ordering the closure of 26 churches in the Kabylie region because they were not registered. No churches had been closed down since then. [Protestant Church of Algeria] members argue, however, that the law is impossible to implement as officials refuse to register their churches despite efforts to comply. They said the authorities apply the law when they want to harass churches.
An evening pause: Fifty years ago tomorrow, on May 25, 1961, John Kennedy spoke to Congress about the world situation and the war between freedom and tyranny. “We stand for freedom,” he began, and finished by committing the United States to sending a man to the Moon and bringing him back safely by the end of the decade.
The clip below shows the first five minutes of that speech. It makes it clear that Kennedy’s main point was not to send the United States to the stars, but to stake out our ground in the battle for freedom and democracy. I will write more about this tomorrow.
To see the whole speech, go to the following link at the Miller Center for Public Affairs.
TSA does a security drill, and forgets to tell the police.
Osama’s killing was not only legal, it was morally right.
Under any sane construction of the laws of war, the killing of Bin Laden was lawful regardless of whether he “raised his hands in surrender” or whether the American soldiers were under orders to shoot without giving him a chance to surrender. By suggesting otherwise, human rights lawyers only make international law look out of step with basic morality and common sense.
The opportunity to surrender is a cherished, civilized and valuable part of warfare. But accepting an enemy’s white flag in the heat of battle is a life-endangering proposition: The flag could be a ruse; a bomb could be hidden; the captors could end up dead. We give enemy soldiers the benefit of this dangerous doubt for two reasons. First, because soldiers who have fought honorably, complying with the laws of war, have earned it. And second, because we want the enemy to treat our soldiers the same way.
Neither reason applies, however, to enemies who flagrantly violate the laws of war, targeting civilians for death, hiding bombs behind burkas, using children as shields or — yes — faking a Red Cross, upraised hands or other symbolic white flags to perpetrate lethal attacks. A white flag makes a statement. It says, I’m giving up; I’m unarmed and pose no threat; I respect the laws of war under which this flag must never be used as a ruse, and I am not using it as a ruse to attack you. Even if we imagine Bin Laden actually waving a little white sock on a stick in Abbottabad, there would have been no reason for our soldiers to credit these statements. No soldier had a duty to take the slightest risk to his own life because Osama bin Laden promised to be good from now on. [emphasis mine]
Philladelphia police harass, threaten to shoot man legally carrying gun.
Not good: Google shuts off blog, then cuts off people who criticize Google.
Bill Clinton yesterday called for the creation of a government agency, either by the U.S or UN, to discredit bad political reporting and quash Internet rumors.
Doesn’t that sound just peachy keen: giving the government the power to correct and control political reporting.
A State Department report on religious freedom in Afghanistan: deteriorating. Two quotes from the report:
Respect for religious freedom deteriorated during the reporting period, particularly for Christian groups and individuals. Residual effects of years of jihad against the USSR, civil strife, Taliban rule, popular suspicion regarding outside influence and the motivations of foreigners, and still weak democratic institutions remained serious obstacles. There were cases of harassment, occasional violence, and inflammatory public statements made by members of parliament and television programming against religious minorities, particularly Christians, and Muslims who were perceived as not respecting Islamic strictures. Negative societal opinion and suspicion of Christian activities led to targeting of Christian groups and individuals, including Afghan converts to Christianity. The lack of government responsiveness and protection for these groups and individuals contributed to the deterioration of religious freedom.
and
The right to change one’s religion was not respected either in law or in practice. Muslims who converted to Christianity risked losing their marriage, rejection from their family and village, and loss of jobs. Following the May 2010 suspension of two NGOs on suspicion of proselytizing, some parliamentarians advocated violent responses toward the alleged apostates, including public execution. [emphasis mine]
This report actually came out in November, 2010, but I hadn’t known of it until now. It is worth reading. Though there are clearly some positive signs, overall the state of religious freedom in Afghanistan appears abysmal.
Recent data leaks from particle hunters is now raising questions among physicists about the question of controlling scientific secrecy. To me, the most significant quote from the article was this:
“Should leakers or bloggers be punished for making early findings public?
That this question is even asked by someone in the science field is disturbing. Though the leaks might be annoying and counter to the agreements the scientists signed when they joined these various projects, I wonder how the author expects such punishment to be administrated. And who would do it? And should such punishment apply to everyone, or just to the participating scientists?
The FAA: slow to ramp up in its role of regulating human space travel.
This ain’t good. It also is not a surprise. The only real question is whether the government bureaucrats at the FAA will get out of the way of those who are really trying to do the work.
Elon Musk defends his vision and success. Key quote:
For the first time in more than three decades, America last year began taking back international market-share in commercial satellite launch. This remarkable turn-around was sparked by a small investment NASA made in SpaceX in 2006 as part of the Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program. A unique public-private partnership, COTS has proven that under the right conditions, a properly incentivized contractor — even an all-American one — can develop extremely complex systems on rapid timelines and a fixed-price basis, significantly beating historical industry-standard costs.
China has the fastest growing economy in the world. But the American free enterprise system, which allows anyone with a better mouse-trap to compete, is what will ensure that the United States remains the world’s greatest superpower of innovation.
To put it simply, Musk is right, on all counts.
An evening pause: The last part of “The Guns of John Browning” from Tales of the Gun.
The documentary correctly honors Browning for the quality of his designs and workmanship. To me, it is more important to honor him for making the weapons that allowed the United States to defend freedom in the twentieth century. Without these tools in the hands of our soldiers, the wars would have been longer and many more lives would have been lost. And worse, the fascists and Nazis and dictators might have won.
As George Bernard Shaw wrote in Major Barbara, “The people must have power.”
A victory for free speech: The NJ Transit worker who was fired for burning a Koran has gotten his job back, plus back pay and $25,000.
Free speech alert: Pastor Terry Jones imprisoned by judge in Deerborn, Michigan to prevent him from protesting against Islam there.
As much as I think Jones is a publicity-seeking fool, his right to speak is sacrosanct. I hope he sues the judge and the city of Deerborn for everything he can get.
Freedom of speech in Michigan: Dearborn denies permit, says Terry Jones could face arrest if he protests.
O really? “We need to protect our authority.”
Leftwing civility: A University of Iowa professor tells college Republicans to “F” off.
Freedom of speech alert: A Michigan town passed a ban on all political signs in a public park in order to silence a Tea Party protest.`
This woman bluntly, clearly, and without apology explains freedom, the first amendment, and the difference between peaceful protest and violence to Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina).
Make sure you watch part 2 of her oration, where she goes through the worst quotes from the Koran (bookmarked with bacon strips!) and burns those pages.
Bernard Lewis: “The tyrannies are doomed.” I hope he’s right.
The religion of peace: Two beheaded and eight others murdered in Afghanistan today in protest against Koran burning.
Burning the Koran might have been a poor idea, but such an act doesn’t justify murder.
Then there’s this: Penn State students assaulted for putting up a display outlining what they considered Palestinian lies.
Once again, the only answer Islam can give to criticism is violence.
Gotta have your KGB: Homeland Security accused of witness tampering, political manipulation of FOIA requests, and the attempted theft of Congressional committee documents.
A man has won $15K in a lawsuit after police seized his gun illegally in a Denver park.
