Relaxed. Enjoyed the tranquility of my home office. Appreciated the beauty and serenity of my garden. Cherished my significant other. Played with my dog. Cruised my favorite Internet sites. Texted a good friend of mine who lives in Florida. Chatted with another friend in Malaysia. Spoke with my brother and wife who live in San Diego. Worked out for over an hour. Watched "The Wizard of Oz" for the first time in its entirety. Listened to my selected MPGs. Cropped photos with my Adobe Photoshop. Laughed at reruns of "What's My Line?" on BBC America.

     Great to be free to do whatever I want. Great to live in America.

     I watched the 2006 Boston Gay Pride Parade last Saturday, June 10th, along with friends at the corner of Appleton and Columbus Streets in the South End. It was raining all day long, as you can see in the photos below. Luckily, I had worn my old PVC yellow rain jacket with hood - and let me tell you - it was everyone's envy! When everyone else was carrying umbrellas too feeble to withstand the winds, I stood comfortably on one corner enjoying the parade and secretly gloating over others who were stupid enough not to wear practical raingear.

     Speaking of the parade, it was the most pathetic parade I've ever seen in the nearly ten years that I have been watching. Due to inclement weather, the parade had to be delayed one hour. But it wasn't the weather that bothered me as much as it was the disorganization and the commonality of the parade. There were more of the same from previous years, and much less of new. You had the usual characters like drag beauty queens, topless dykes on bikes, and leathered muscle boys - nothing that I have never seen before. I was hoping that the two gay male mannequins would be paraded, but none of that sort. There was not a soul protesting Macy's either. And lo and behold - miraculously - I didn't see any religious freaks carrying "God Hates Fags" signs!

     Last night, I watched Larry King Live on CNN and the panelists debated a rather cliché topic: Is Homosexuality a Sin? The panel included America's first openly gay Episcopal bishop V. Gene Robinson, an openly lesbian Episcolian minister, a Southern Baptist minister, a conservative Catholic priest, a conservative Episcopalian priest, and Andrew Sullivan, an openly gay TIME columnist and devout Catholic who runs his own blog. Sullivan argued that he was born gay, that he is what he is, that he loves the Catholic Church, and encourages lapsed gay Catholics to come back to the church and to love their faith. The conservatives held on their literal interpretation of certain scriptures that allude to the condemnation of homosexual acts.

     Like the Boston Gay Parade, there was nothing, absolutely nothing, that I have not heard before. Religious gays will always find ways to make themselves believe that God loves them for who they are and what they do in the privacy of their bedroom as long as they're monogamous. On the other hand, the religious conservatives will always find ways to make themselves believe that every word in the Bible is divinely inspired and closed to interpretation. As Robinson brilliantly stated, the conservatives waste too much time scrutinizing, criticizing, judging and condemning gay people instead of focusing on real issues that truly threaten the world like diseases, poverty, social injustice, crimes, etc. We can spend as much time as we want debating human sexuality, doctrinal differences, theological questions and whether or not Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had children. Who cares? The conservatives may claim to be God's favorite children, but they also know that they will always fall short of His glory. Anyone who presumes to be spiritually pure will be the last to enter paradise. After all, we will all be judged for the way we treat each other, and not for how much goodness we have accomplished or how many Bible verses we can recite.

    I'm off to Washington, D.C. this weekend to attend a fashion show! Woo-hoo!

     Now here's something to make your gay blood boil. Boston Herald reported:

Macy's removes gay pride display

June 7, 2006

BOSTON --Macy's department store has removed a window display marking Boston's gay pride week after a group that opposes gay marriage complained it was offensive.

The display at the downtown Boston store featured two male mannequins, with one wearing a gay pride rainbow flag around his waist, next to a list of several planned Boston Pride Week events.

MassResistance, formerly the Article 8 Alliance, which has campaigned against gay marriage and gay-themed textbooks in public schools, objected to the display and said the mannequin wearing the flag had a "skirt" on, the Boston Herald reported.

The group posted pictures on its Web site and scores of its supporters complained to Macy's by phone and e-mail.

Elina Kazan, a Macy's spokeswoman, said the store decided to remove the mannequins but leave the list of events in order to strike a balance. Displays in previous years did not use mannequins.

"We believe in diversity, and our customers are very important to us," Kazan said. "But (the display) did offend a few of our customers, and we had to re-examine it.

ACLU of Massachusetts spokeswoman Sarah Wunsch criticized Macy's for "succumbing to the bigotry" of what she said was a fringe anti-gay group. 

     Kazan said that the display offended "a few" of Macy's customers. Why would Macy's yield to the demands of just a few narrow-minded customers when it should be spending more of its energy in attracting a larger open-minded customers? A few years ago, I had written to Macy's customer relations department protesting the sale of real fur coat at its downtown Boston store, and the only reply I got was a generic "thank-you-for-writing-but-we-do-believe-that-it-is-appropriate-that-we-offer-all-of-our-customers-a-wide-array-of-merchandise-choices."

     Every winter, there isn't a day when you don't see fur-wearing mannequins at Macy's display windows, and as an animal welfare activist, I am offended everytime I see them. I am offended by the horrendous cruelty and violence involved in the manufacture of fur, yet Macy's and other stores continue to deny such abominable practice even when it is well-documented. Now the religious freaks at MassResistance claim that they are offended by the sight of "two male mannequins, with one wearing a gay pride rainbow flag around his waist." How could anyone, seriously, be offended by a pair of plastic mannequins especially when no living creature was purposely killed or hurt in the making of the mannequins? How often do you see male mannequins together ("celebrating" Gay Pride) in a Macy's display window, compared to female/male mannequins wearing real fur coat and/or skimpy swimwear (I am surprised the religious nuts have not made a big deal about the latter!)

     Just based on the arguments above, I don't see the logic behind Macy's decision to remove the mannequins whatsoever. By caving in to the demands of a religious few - which, by the way - may not necessarily affect Macy's profits -  Macy's has now officially become a "slave" to religious fundamentalists, in the same way that European host countries have submitted themselves to the demands of their Islamofascist residents. Yes, Macy's has allowed a fringe minority group of ignorant, miseducated, misguided and obnoxious individuals to affect the way the store handles its business and its relationship with the gay community which, by the way, is a far greater consumer than the MassResistance barfbags.

The Controversial Mannequins: Before & After

Mannequin police on patrol to nip it in the bud

The Boston Pride Committee's Response

MassResistance Watch

     Recently in Baghdad, an Iraqi tennis coach and two of his players were shot to death because they were wearing shorts. That's right, shorts! Guess who the perpetrators were? The Islamofascists. Associated Press writes:

The men were killed Wednesday, a week after the warning was issued in leaflets distributed in southwest Baghdad.

An official of the Iraqi Tennis Union says gunmen stopped the car the athletes were riding in and asked them to step out before shooting them.

The coach was Sunni and the two players were Shiite.

It was the second attack against athletes in just over a week. A taekwondo team was kidnapped in western Iraq on May 17. The 15 athletes were members of a sports club that hopes to one day send athletes to the Olympics.

     What is wrong with the killers? Everything. From their twisted interpretation of their so-called holy texts to their unhealthy Weltenschaaung. From their incurable lunacy to their outrageous lack of fashion sense. And lack of playfulness, I may add. Not only do they hate sports attire that exposes a lot of skin, but they hate all sports, period.

     I'm not a big lover of sports as I am a big lover of beauty pageants. I have been following pageants for nearly thirty years and I can tell you that I have never heard of a beauty pageant that does not include a swimsuit competition. Even Miss America, which does not consider itself a beauty pageant but a scholarship pageant (read: you don't have to be pretty to win) has always had a swimsuit event. In virtually every beauty pageant, the contestants are given the option to wear a one-piece or a two-piece. There is never the option to wear a loose swimwear (you know, the kind that does not touch your genitalia). When a British Iraqi Muslim woman, Sarah Mendly, was participating in the Miss England 2005 contest, she opted to wear a one-piece swimsuit with a sarong - a swimwear that might be considered traditional or conservative by those who have been accustomed to wearing a bikini. Despite Mendly's "modest" swimwear, Muslim leaders in Britain called for Mendly's withdrawal from the pageant. Mendly eventually won and represented England in Miss World.

     Islamic countries have been sending beautiful young women to international beauty pageants, and several Muslim women have won international beauty titles, such as Lebanon's Georgina Rizk (Miss Universe 1971) who, by the way, chose to wear a two-piece see-through harem pants (left photo); Turkey's Azra Akin (Miss World 2002) who wore a two-piece swimwear (center photo) and Afghanistan's Vida Samadzai who caused international sensation when she wore a two-piece red bikini in Miss Earth 2003 (right photo):

     Although Samadzai did not win Miss Earth 2003, she did receive a special award called "Beauty For A Cause."  In Miss Universe 2005, Indonesia's Artika Sari Devi wore a one-piece swimsuit and made the top 15, despite protests from angry Islamofascists in her country. Samadzai and Devi truly deserve a medal of courage for defying their Islamofascist detractors, more so that the two women come from countries where Islam has a stronghold on people's lives unlike Lebanon (which is very Western) or Turkey (which is a secularized society). But the point is, no matter where a woman lives, or whether she's pretty or ugly, she should have the fundamental right to wear whatever she pleases.

     Modest Islamic Swimwear

Warm Welcome for Sharia Swimsuit

"Oh my, God! Her legs are exposed!"

     Finally, a sane, rational and compassionate judge supports gay marriage! Hee-haw! The Associated Press reports:

Judge Strikes Down Ga. Ban on Gay Marriage

By GREG BLUESTEIN, Associated Press Writer 

5/16/2006 

A judge has struck down Georgia's ban on same-sex marriages, saying a measure overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2004 violated a provision of the state constitution that limits ballot questions to a single subject.

The ruling by Fulton County Superior Court Judge Constance C. Russell had been eagerly awaited by gay-rights supporters who filed the court challenge in November 2004, soon after the constitutional ban was approved.

Russell said the state's voters must first decide whether same-sex relationships should have any legal status before they can be asked to decide whether same-sex marriages should be banned.

"People who believe marriages between men and women should have a unique and privileged place in our society may also believe that same-sex relationships should have some place — although not marriage," she wrote. "The single-subject rule protects the right of those people to hold both views and reflect both judgments by their vote."

Russell said "procedural safeguards such as the single-subject rule rarely enjoy public support."

"But ultimately it is those safeguards that preserve our liberties, because they ensure that the actions of government are constrained by the rule of law," the judge wrote.

Jack Senterfitt, who challenged the amendment on behalf of gay rights organization Lambda Legal, said the ruling "protects the right of voters to make independent decisions on each independent issue."

Gov. Sonny Perdue said the decision ran counter to the voice of Georgia voters in defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

"The people of Georgia knew exactly what they were doing when an overwhelming 76 percent voted in support of this constitutional amendment," he said. "It is sad that a single judge has chosen to reverse this decision."

Perdue said the state is considering appealing the decision to the Georgia Supreme Court.

    The real issue, then, is defining the word "marriage," and not so much whether or not gay people have the right to marry. Merriam-Webster dictionary defines marriage in these terms:

Etymology: Middle English mariage, from Anglo-French, from marier to marry
1 a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b : the mutual relation of married persons : WEDLOCK c : the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
2 : an act of marrying or the rite by which the married status is effected; especially : the wedding ceremony and attendant festivities or formalities
3 : an intimate or close union <the marriage of painting and poetry -- J. T. Shawcross>

     I love this definition by George Bernard Shaw: "When two people are under the influence of the most violent, most insane, most delusive, and most transient of passions, they are required to swear that they will remain in that excited, abnormal, and exhausting condition until death do them part."

     Russell obviously subscribes to the traditional definition of marriage as a legally recognized union between man and woman, and she intimates that a union between two people of the same sex should be called something else. Fine. I think the term "civil union" suits many gay couples; if civil unions are recognized in all states, and "marriage" is strictly reserved for straight couples, then everyone will be happy. This should not, in any way, prevent gay couples from uttering the words "marriage" or "marry" when they refer to their civil unions. Now the question is, are there straight couples who'd rather go gay by adopting "civil union" instead of "marriage?" Will these straight couples be allowed to get married, err, "civilly united," because they feel that the word "marriage" has too much negative stigma attached to it? 

     The only people who want to preserve the traditional definition of marriage are sadly those who cannot see beyond definition. True marriage is not about definition or roles; it is about companionship, trust, honesty, mutual respect, mutual edification, and of course, unconditional love - at least - this is the kind of relationship that my partner and I have had in the last eleven years. Any rational person will tell you that gay marriages will not cause the human race to vanish, any more than straight marriages will establish perpetual world order. Yawn.

Religious Support for Equal Marriage Rights

The Content of Historic Same-Sex Unions

     You live in a beautiful house with a beautiful garden in a beautiful and peaceful neighborhood in a beautiful city. You and your partner have been living in this beautiful house for nearly a decade and you have done several renovations - inside and out - to maintain the beauty and charm of the house. Not too long ago, you had a beautiful new wooden fence put up.

     Since you and your partner have been living in this beautiful house in this beautiful and peaceful neighborhood, you have hosted many beautiful gatherings with friends and family. So far, you have nothing but beautiful memories, and these memories bring you a sense of peace and inspire you to create even more beautiful memories.

     You and your partner value your house not because of its beauty, but because it is your home. You have invested a lot of time, money and energy in converting your house into a true, beautiful, peaceful and inviting home.

     But alas, the beauty and the peace and security of your home has been threatened by illegal aliens who are trespassing your property, leaving trash all over the place, and even urinating and defecating on your freshly mowed lawn. You are not alone. You are among the hundreds and thousands of law-abiding U.S. citizens (native-born or naturalized) whose very existence and whose way of life are constantly being threatened by hundreds and thousands of illegal aliens who have no respect for law. Some of these aliens have strong criminal backgrounds...

... and some are men who have abandoned their wives and children!

     If you value your property, if you value your home, if you value your way of life, if you value America,  say no to illegal immigration and say yes to building the fence!

    And can you imagine America encouraging its poor legal residents to move up to Canada? My God! Would our Canadian friends still remain our friends?

        I listened to the infamous, newly minted Spanish version of the "Star-Spangled Banner" called "Nuestro Himno" and here's what I think:

1. It is painful to listen to it and hard to sing (at least in the current version). I speak fluent Spanish and I just couldn't follow the excessive elongation of the last syllables in each verse.

2. Some blogger commented that the lyrics in Spanish are whiny. I don't think so. In the original English version by Key,  the flag is still "gallantly" standing after giving a "perilous" fight. In the chorus of the Spanish version, the singer questions the invincibility of the flag.  The second verse evokes images of slavery and oppression as the singer urges his "people" to break the chains and to continue fighting (I suppose, for their "right" to remain in America).

3. I don't have any problem with national anthems being sung in other languages, as long as the foreign interpretations remain loyal to the original. A good example is the Philippine national anthem written and sung in Filipino, English and Spanish.  Besides, the U.S. national anthem has been recorded and sung in jazz, hard metal rock, country, pop and hip-hop. Singing it in Spanish does not worry me; it's how the lyrics and ideas are presented that does. 

"Star-Spangled Banner" in its original English written by Francis Scott Key in 1814:     Oh, say, can you see, by the dawn's early light, What so proudly we hail'd at the twilight's last gleaming? Whose broad stripes and bright stars, thro' the perilous fight, O'er the ramparts we watch'd, were so gallantly streaming? And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air, Gave proof thro' the night that our flag was still there. O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

And now the Spanish version and its English translation:

And what are your thoughts, dear readers?

     Conservative columnist Michelle Malkin, in her latest article, decries President Bush's claim that Americans lack compassion towards illegal aliens. Malkin fires back by saying that Bush lacks compasssion towards U.S. citizens:

The victims of illegal immigration

By Michelle Malkin

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com 

President Bush accuses those of us who want to secure America's borders and fully enforce our immigration laws of lacking "compassion."

Huh. Well, I have yet to hear an ounce of compassion from President Bush for America's countless casualties of lax immigration enforcement. Where's the sympathy for innocent, law-abiding citizens who have lost their lives at the hands of illegal aliens and their open-borders enablers?

Nope, we haven't heard a word about the victims as the White House pours on its unadulterated pro-illegal alien rhetoric and "undocumented workers do the jobs Americans won't do" propaganda — all in support of a massive, ill-timed, bureaucratic nightmare-inducing amnesty plan that will inevitably increase illegal immigration.

Last week, a notorious illegal alien serial killer who traipsed freely across the U.S.-Mexican border during a 25-year, escalating crime spree popped up in the news again. The case of Angel Resendiz, a convicted death row murderer in President Bush's home state of Texas, is a timely reminder of the deadly costs of our continued homeland security chaos.

Time and again, illegal alien day laborer Resendiz broke the law getting into our country; broke more laws while in the country; and then broke the law repeatedly and brazenly after being released, deported, and allowed to return. His most brutal acts included the slayings of 12 people, ranging in age from 16 to 81, which ended in 1999 when Resendiz surrendered to a Texas Ranger in El Paso. For the last seven years, Resendiz has been perched comfortably on Death Row — eating chocolate cream pies, watching Spanish-language television, whining about depression, and selling locks of his hair on Internet auction sites.

His execution, scheduled for May 10, has been delayed pending yet another of his endless appeals claiming to be "insane."

As I recounted in my book Invasion, Resendiz entered and exited our country at will. From the time he was 14, he racked up arrests and convictions ranging from trespassing, destruction of property, burglary, aggravated batter, and grand theft auto to carrying a loaded firearm and false representation of U.S. citizenship. He had at least 25 encounters with U.S. law enforcement between August 1976 and August 1996, when he was arrested and released for trespassing in a Kentucky railyard.

During that period, he was convicted at least nine times on several serious felon charges. He was deported to Mexico by the feds at least three times and was "voluntarily returned" to Mexico at least four times without formal proceedings. Throughout 1998, the Border Patrol continued its blind catch-and-release policy — apprehending Resendiz seven times and letting him go on his own recognizance despite his massive criminal record and three prior deportations. Shoddy fingerprint databases, immigration paperwork negligence, and unpoliced borders led to:

- The bludgeoning death of Florida teenager Jesse Howell and the rape and strangulation murder of his fiancé, Wendy Von Huben.

- The bludgeoning death of University of Kentucky student Christopher Maier and the rape and near-murder of his girlfriend, who survived the attack.

- The murder of Leafie Mason, an elderly Texas whom Resendiz hammered to death with a fire iron.

- The rape, stabbing, and bludgeoning death of Baylor College of Medicine researcher Claudia Benton.

- The sledgehammer bludgeonings of Texas pastor Norman Sirnic and his wife, Karen.

- The bludgeoning death of Houston teacher Noemi Dominguez.

- The murder of elderly Texas widow Josephine Konvicka, who was killed with a grubbing hoe.

- The murders of George Morber, shot in the head, and Carolyn Frederick, clubbed to death.

The last four of Resendiz's victims were murdered after Resendiz had been released by federal immigration officials — even though there were already warrants outstanding for his arrest.

Resendiz made a bloody mockery of our homeland security chaos. Congress and the White House are now preparing to add grave insult to fatal injury by refusing to fix the persistent problems that facilitated Resendiz's crimes.

Campaigning for amnesty this week, President Bush mouthed the open-borders mantra against tough deportation policies and lectured immigration enforcement advocates about their lack of sensitivity.

"I can understand it's emotional," he said, but "we're talking about human beings, decent human beings that need to be treated with respect."

I don't think the victims of "undocumented worker" Angel Resendiz would agree.

     Right on, Michelle. Although I do not necessarily agree with Malkin's views all the time, her latest column underlines once again Dubya's idiocy and cluelessness in the face of imminent threat and danger. 

Crime Victims of Illegal Aliens

The Illegal Alien Crime Wave

Myths and Lies of Illegal Immigration

     Here's the latest casualty...

Tragic End for a Maid

By Richard C. Paddock, Times Staff Writer
April 20, 2006

Normina Piang was 17 when her foreign nightmare began. It ended when she died at age 20.

Her home was a one-room bamboo hut in a Muslim village on the southern Philippine island of Mindanao. It had neither electricity nor running water.

Desperate to help her family, she applied for work as a maid overseas. A recruitment agency found her a job in Kuwait in exchange for her first three months' pay. Until the agency gave her a two-week housekeeping course, she had never seen a vacuum cleaner.

When she got to Kuwait, she found that she would be cleaning a two-story, seven-bathroom house, doing laundry, cooking and caring for four children, ages 1 to 12. She worked from 5 a.m. to midnight without days off. She slept on the floor without a mattress, she recounted in an interview months before she died.

According to her contract, she was supposed to receive $200 a month, but like many Philippine maids in Kuwait, she got only about three-quarters of what she was promised.

Unable to understand Arabic, she quickly ran into trouble. The older children hit her and threw shoes at her, she said. Their mother slapped her.

Piang said she ran away to her employment agency office, but the recruiter ordered her to keep working to pay back the fee. When she got back to her employers' home, the woman beat her. The husband tried to kiss her and tore her dress. Piang said she asked to be taken to the Philippine Embassy, but the man held a knife to her throat and said he would kill her if she did not work.

At 4 o'clock the next morning, she slipped out of the house. With the help of a passerby who gave her bus fare, she reached the Philippine Embassy. But she was unable to leave the country because her employers had kept her passport and return ticket.

Two weeks later, they turned over the documents. But police said the couple also had filed a complaint against her for running away. An embassy employee delivered her to the police station, she said.

There were no charges, but police locked her up anyway. During the night, three officers came into her cell. One tore her clothes, beat her unconscious and raped her. It was not until the next evening that an embassy worker returned to pick her up.

After she filed a complaint, the officers offered to marry her or pay compensation. She refused. For the next eight months, she lived on the embassy grounds, waiting for a court date.

The compound was overflowing with runaway maids. By day, the temperature often exceeded 100 degrees. The women bathed by pouring water over themselves with a bucket.

"You sit there, that's it," Piang said. "You line up for food. You line up to use the bathroom."

As she waited, she developed a urinary tract infection that she believed was caused by the rape. It went untreated until it apparently spread to her kidneys. She was hospitalized, but her illness was never cured.

A Kuwaiti judge convicted the three officers, sentencing the one who raped her to 15 years in prison and the other two to 10 years. The sentences were later reduced to seven and five years.

Piang was proud of making a stand.

"No Filipino ever sent a cop to prison," she said. But she went home sick and empty-handed. Unable to work, she lived with her aunt in a one-room apartment in Manila, surviving on the $3 a day her aunt made selling hair clips on the street.

Piang didn't go home to Mindanao for more than six months, not because of the rape but because she had lost her job.

An advocacy group, Migrante International, tried to help her get assistance from the government, which collects millions of dollars from workers leaving the country to aid those who encounter problems.

"Her illness was not fatal, but got worse from neglect," said Migrante Chairperson Connie Bragas-Regalado. "She had to beg for medication from the Overseas Workers Welfare Administration," the Philippine agency at the embassy where Piang and the other runaway maids had stayed.

The government gave Piang $180 for medical tests. Instead, she used the money to go to Mindanao.

Bragas-Regalado said that in their last conversation, Piang seemed to know she was dying. But she was more concerned about helping her family. She asked that Migrante International pursue a lawsuit against the Kuwaiti police officers in the hope of winning enough to educate five younger siblings.

Until she died last year, Piang was angry that she had come home with nothing: "I worry because instead of helping my family, I became a problem."

   And another one: Lebanon's Sri Lankan maids tell their story 

   When you're a poor and uneducated woman - and have a family to feed - you would do anything to survive. But what sets Normina Piang apart from most poor and uneducated women is that she never let anyone rob her dignity and self-worth.

       Flashback news:

Foreign maids abused in Malaysia

Arab columnist: Why we really don't need maids

Sri Lankan maids abused in the Middle East

8 of 12 Filipino maids are abused abroad

Indigenous maids are target of abuse and racism in Mexico

     Okay, I'm back after a hiatus for three weeks. I have been following news in MSM and in my favorite blogs, so I am not really out of the loop so to speak. Let me see - apart from the continuing debates on immigration reforms in the U.S., the only other issue that continues to interest me is Islamofascism. We all know that any democracy is a potential haven for terrorists, and that in virtually every democratic country you will find mosques where radical imams preach hatred towards non-believers. Today's edition of The Times reports that U.K. Muslim students who wish to be imams are "being taught to despise unbelievers as filth." But the students are protesting this insipid doctrine:

MUSLIM students training to be imams at a British college with strong Iranian links have complained that they are being taught fundamentalist doctrines which describe nonMuslims as “filth”.

The Times has obtained extracts from medieval texts taught to the students in which unbelievers are likened to pigs and dogs. The texts are taught at the Hawza Ilmiyya of London, a religious school, which has a sister institution, the Islamic College for Advanced Studies (ICAS), which offers a degree validated by Middlesex University.

The students, who have asked to remain anonymous, study their religious courses alongside the university-backed BA in Islamic studies. They spend two days a week as religious students and three days on their university course.

Read the entire article here.

     Bravo for the students for realizing that Islam is not entirely a peaceful religion. One thing that is equally bothersome is that these students are also being taught to despise animals such as dogs and pigs because they are "unclean" along with "urine, faeces, semen, carrion, blood of carrion, dogs, pigs, disbelievers." Any reasonable modern thinker and proponents of alternative medicine will tell you that urine has medical benefits, that having a pet can extend your life, and that women who swallow their lovers' semen may prevent ovarian cancer and depression. What is gross to many may be tasty to some!

     So I guess based on the observations above, it is safe to assume that we - the "filthy disbelievers" - are far more open to scientific and medical explorations than your average Islamo and Islamette.

     Last Tuesday, the Associated Press published a fact sheet presenting some highlights of the immigration proposals that are currently being debated in the U.S. Congress.

Senate Judiciary Committee's bill:

—Allows illegal immigrants who were in the United States before 2004 to continuing working legally for six years if they pay a $1,000 fine and clear a criminal background check. They would become eligible for permanent residence upon paying another $1,000 fine, any back taxes and having learned English.

—New immigrants would have to have temporary work visas. They also could earn legal permanent residence after six years.

—Adds up to 14,000 new Border Patrol agents by 2011 to the current force of 11,300 agents.

—Authorizes a "virtual wall" of unmanned vehicles, cameras and censors to monitor the U.S.-Mexico border.

—Creates a special guest worker program for an estimated 1.5 million immigrant farm workers, who can also earn legal permanent residency.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's proposal:

—Requires all employers to verify the identity and immigration status of their employees through an electronic system.

—Assesses civil penalties of between $500 and $20,000 against employers for each illegal immigrant they hire and criminal penalties of up to $20,000 per illegal immigrant hired and up to six months in jail for engaging in a pattern of employing illegal workers.

—More than doubles the number of employment-based green cards, from 140,000 to 290,000, and makes more employment based visas available to unskilled workers. It also would free up other visas by exempting immediate relatives of U.S. citizens from being counted in the annual pool of 480,000 visas, and increase country-by-country ceilings on family sponsored and employment-based immigrants.

—Cancels visas of immigrants who have overstayed their visas and requires them to return to their home country to undergo additional screening at U.S. consulates.

—Makes it a misdemeanor crime for an immigrant to be in the country illegally.

—Increases the number of visas available for high-tech workers.

—Does not address President Bush's proposal for a guest worker program.

House bill passed in December:

—Requires all employers to use within six years a database to verify Social Security numbers of employees or face civil or criminal penalties for hiring illegal workers.

—Requires mandatory detention for all non-Mexican illegal immigrants arrested at ports of entry or at land and sea borders.

—Establishes mandatory sentences for smuggling illegal immigrants and for re-entering the United States illegally after deportation.

—Makes illegal presence in the country a felony.

—Makes a drunken driving conviction a deportable offense.

—Requires building two-layer fences along 700 miles of the 2,000-mile border between Mexico and the United States.

—Does not address President Bush's proposed guest worker program for illegal immigrants already in U.S.

     After having seen images of highschool students (many of whom are Americans of Mexican descent) desecrating the U.S. flag by flying it upside down underneath the Mexican flag, I see myself agreeing even more with Bill Frist's proposals. Read his blog here.

     Meanwhile, Latino television viewers are enjoying two new telenovelas ("soap operas') "made in the United States that depict the conflicting and sometimes unsavory lives of undocumented immigrants."

     Across the ocean, Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi warns against multiculturalism.

     Last weekend, hundreds and thousands of people - mostly Hispanics - converged in Los Angeles and other cities across the U.S. to protest the immigration reforms initiated by the Republican party. Last December, the House of Representatives passed legislation that would make illegal residency a felony; it would also impose new penalties on employers who hire illegal immigrants and erect fences along one-third of the U.S.-Mexican border. The Senate is to begin debating the proposals today.

     The huge presence of Hispanics in the rallies would suggest that all Hispanics in the U.S. disagree with the immigration reforms. Surprisingly, there are many Hispanics - some of whom are foreign-born - who align themselves with the Republican party. Consider these news reports:

     Don't assume U.S. Hispanics are soft on immigration

     Maintain or cut migration, most Hispanics in U.S. say

     Poll finds Hispanics split on illegals, immigration

     Native-born Hispanics tend to be critical

     Latinos against illegal immigration

     These Hispanics - as well as other legal immigrants in the U.S. - surely would agree with former president James Madison who said that “Americans should welcome immigrants who truly desire to join our society and assimilate. But, he said, it should reject those who want to operate as independent subcultures.”

     ... with Alexander Hamilton, one of the Founding Fathers, who said, "The safety of a republic depends essentially on the energy of a common national sentiment; on a uniformity of principles and habits and on the love of country."

     ... and with former president Woodrow Wilson who said in a speech entitled Americanism and the Foreign-Born: "And while you bring all countries with you, you come with a purpose of leaving all other countries behind you, bringing what is best of their spirit, but not looking over your shoulder and seeking to perpetuate what you intended to leave behind in them."

     I'd like to see more Hispanic parents naming their sons James, Alexander or Woodrow! Well, maybe not Woodrow. Woody would be good enough.

     Here's another proof how veganism could save a person's life. From the New York Times:

Firefighters Gone Vegan? Even Austin Is Impressed

By DEBORAH BLUMENTHAL

Published: March 26, 2006

AUSTIN, Tex. — The image of big brawny firefighters devouring platters of four-alarm chili, sizzling steaks and double cheeseburgers is as much a part of firehouse lore as brass fire poles and heroic Dalmatians.

"They're dinosaurs, they're big meat eaters," said Joseph T. Bonanno Jr., a former New York City firefighter and the author of "The Firehouse Grilling Cookbook" (Broadway Books, 1998).

But not here.

In this health-conscious state capital, sometimes called the People's Republic of Austin, maverick behavior is nothing out of the ordinary. But when Jimmy John's, the local sandwich joint, names a sandwich after you, "the Engine 2 Veggie Sandwich"; when People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals gives you an award for "Animal-Friendly Firehouse of the Year"; and when people call out to passing fire trucks, "Are y'all the vegans?" even Austin is taking notice.

The five firefighters of Team C at Firehouse 2 — Rip Esselstyn, James Rae, Matt Moore, Derick Zwerneman and Scott Walters — now eat vegan, taking turns whipping up plant-based fare like meatless and cheeseless pizza, pasta primavera and spinach enchiladas.

It did not happen because they shared a love of sprouts.

A routine cholesterol test left Specialist Rae, 37, shaken. The American Heart Association ranks anyone with a level of 240 or more high risk; Specialist Rae's hit 344.

"I was floored, scared," he said. "I had no clue."

All but one of his male relatives had succumbed to heart disease by age 59. Specialist Rae's father, the sole survivor, had a heart attack and then triple bypass surgery in his mid-50's.

The team's nutrition guru came to his aid. Firefighter Esselstyn, 43, a professional triathlete for a decade before joining the department in 1997, was living proof that meat was not necessary for hard work and endurance. He became a vegetarian in 1986 and a vegan in 2002. He persuaded the group to rally around Specialist Rae and start cooking vegan dishes.

Firefighter Esselstyn knew through his father's work that a strict vegan diet would help. His father, Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn Jr., had been a general surgeon at the Cleveland Clinic and still conducts research there.

Dr. Esselstyn's 12-year trial with patients with what looked like terminal heart disease showed that a very-low-fat, plant-based diet with cholesterol-lowering medicine could bring striking improvement.

Heart disease "never need exist," Dr. Esselstyn said, but if it does, "it never need progress."

His son cited another reason for improving Specialist Rae's health.

"J. R. became more of a liability than an asset to us," Firefighter Esselstyn said, glancing at his partner with a half-smile. "Do I want a guy with a bad ticker dragging me out?"

But while Specialist Rae adhered to the diet at the firehouse, he was not as strict outside. He became what he calls a flexitarian, someone who occasionally eats meat or fish. When that did not lower his cholesterol enough, he switched to the vegan diet based on fruits, vegetables, whole grains and legumes. Now, he said, his cholesterol is under 200, and he calls the way he eats "a way of life."

While Team C eats vegan at work — each man shops and cooks dinner twice a month — the other two members, Lieutenant Walters and Firefighter Zwerneman, are not always such purists at home.

At a recent party catered by a barbecue restaurant, Firefighter Zwerneman did not stick to just the beans, a mistake he later realized.

"The next night I was paying for it," he said. "I felt sort of the way I did after my first couple of tofu dinners, which didn't go so well either. But now I'm one of the weirdos like everybody else."

For the other 10 men in Firehouse 2, the vegan diet has not gone down so easily. Inside the freezer are a bag of cheeseburgers, French fries and a package of beef next to vegan offerings. One firefighter even put up provocative posters on the walls, including one that reads, "Beef. It's What's for Dinner."

Firefighter Esselstyn and the others shrug it off.

"Seventy percent of our calls are medical," he said. "Every day we see the ravages of people eating to their heart's content." If not for Specialist Rae's cholesterol, he said, "there would have been someone else, someone prediabetic or obese who would have prompted us."

To reach the public, Team C has a Web site — www.engine2.org — with goofy pictures of the men posing with fruits and vegetables, campy biographies, health links, and recipes like Paul McCartney's enchiladas, tortilla pie and Station 2's award-winning wraps.

Even the firehouse carnivores benefit from the vegan cookery, routinely scavenging leftovers. As Edward Roel, a driver on the B shift, admitted, "They taste good."

     Honestly, if a firefighter were to rescue you from a burning building, would you hope for a fat and overweight carnivore one to come, or a fit and strong vegetarian or vegan? Have you ever wondered that the strongest and biggest mammals (elephants, giraffes, rhinoceri, gorillas, oxen, bulls, horses) are all predominantly herbivores?

DON'T LET THIS PICTURE FOOL YOU

     Okay, this story is very disturbing...

China harvesting inmates' organs, journalist says

By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published March 24, 2006

A Chinese journalist has uncovered a secret detention center in northern China that is being used by a hospital to harvest human organs for sale to domestic and international buyers.

Jin Zhong, a pseudonym for the journalist who fled China recently, also said in an interview that a failed Chinese intelligence operation led to the 2004 death of a Japanese diplomat who committed suicide rather than give up secrets.

On the prisoner abuse, Mr. Jin said he first learned of the harvesting operation between October and December and that the prisoners used were members of the outlawed Falun Gong religious group.

"This is murder, and murder sponsored by a state," said Mr. Jin, who in the past has been a contributor to a Japanese news agency. "It must be stopped."

Mr. Jin said he came across the underground detention center while researching the Chinese government's response to the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).

A Chinese official was the first person to reveal that secret medical work was being done at the Liaoning Provincial Thrombosis Hospital of Integrated Chinese and Western Medicine, in Sujiatun, a suburb of Shenyang, the major city in northeastern China, he said.

Mr. Jin then said he found out that a large underground prison was built beneath the hospital and that members of the outlawed Falun Gong religious group were being held there. As many as 6,000 people are thought to be held prisoner at the underground facility, he said.

The hospital is harvesting the organs of the prisoners, including kidneys, livers, and eye parts, he said. The organs are then sold to people, from both China and abroad, who need medical organ transplants.

One source for Mr. Jin was the wife of a hospital doctor who was involved in the organ harvesting. The doctor suffered psychological problems as a result of the gruesome medical work and disclosed the secret activity. The Chinese woman also has fled to the United States.

Several other hospital workers also revealed details about the prisoner organ harvesting.

Mr. Jin said he had to hide his true identity after being threatened by Chinese government agents. He was arrested twice for his reporting and recently fled to the United States, where he hopes to seek political asylum.

Mr. Jin said bodies of the prisoners were burned in the boiler room of the hospital and that boiler room workers had taken jewelry and watches from the dead and sold them. He said he has provided information about the organ harvesting to U.S. government officials, including members of Congress.

A Chinese Embassy spokesman could not be reached for comment.

Regarding the Japanese diplomat, Mr. Jin said he first learned of the intelligence operation in December. Japan's government protested the Chinese intelligence operation, which Beijing dismissed as a groundless accusation.

     I hope none of these human organs are ending up in Buddha's Delight, my favorite vegetarian restaurant in Boston's Chinatown!

     Is this guy a genuine Christian, a Muslim pretending to be a Christian just to piss off the Islamists in his country, a retarded religious freak (regardless of his denomination), or a spy for the United States? Associated Press reports:

Afghan Convert May Be Unfit for Trial

By DANIEL COONEY, Associated Press Writer 

An Afghan man facing a possible death penalty for converting from Islam to Christianity may be mentally unfit to stand trial, a state prosecutor said Wednesday.

Abdul Rahman, 41, has been charged with rejecting Islam, a crime under this country's Islamic laws. His trial started last week and he confessed to becoming a Christian 16 years ago. If convicted, he could be executed.

But prosecutor Sarinwal Zamari said questions have been raised about his mental fitness.

"We think he could be mad. He is not a normal person. He doesn't talk like a normal person," he told The Associated Press.

Moayuddin Baluch, a religious adviser to President Hamid Karzai, said Rahman would undergo a psychological examination.

"Doctors must examine him," he said. "If he is mentally unfit, definitely Islam has no claim to punish him. He must be forgiven. The case must be dropped."

It was not immediately clear when he would be examined or when the trial would resume. Authorities have barred attempts by the AP to see Rahman and he is not believed to have a lawyer.

A Western diplomat in Kabul and a human rights advocate — both of whom spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter — said the government was desperately searching for a way to drop the case because of the reaction it has caused.

The United States, Britain and other countries that have troops in Afghanistan have voiced concern about Rahman's fate.

The Bush administration Tuesday issued a subdued appeal to Kabul to let Rahman practice his faith in safety. German Roman Catholic Cardinal Karl Lehmann said the trial sent an "alarming signal" about freedom of worship in Afghanistan.

The case is believed to be the first of its kind in Afghanistan and highlights a struggle between religious conservatives and reformists over what shape Islam should take there four years after the ouster of the fundamentalist Taliban regime.

Afghanistan's constitution is based on Shariah law, which is interpreted by many Muslims to require that any Muslim who rejects Islam be sentenced to death. The state-sponsored Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission has called for Rahman to be punished, arguing he clearly violated Islamic law.

The case has received widespread attention in Afghanistan where many people are demanding Rahman be severely punished.

"For 30 years, we have fought religious wars in this country and there is no way we are going to allow an Afghan to insult us by becoming Christian," said Mohammed Jan, 38, who lives opposite Rahman's father, Abdul Manan, in Kabul. "This has brought so much shame."

Rahman is believed to have converted from Islam to Christianity while working as a medical aid worker for an international Christian group helping Afghan refugees in the Pakistani city of Peshawar.

He then moved to Germany for nine years before returning to Kabul in 2002, after the ouster of the hard-line Taliban regime.

Police arrested him last month after discovering him in possession of a Bible during questioning over a dispute for custody of his two daughters. Prosecutors have offered to drop the charges if Rahman converts back to Islam, but he has refused.

___

Associated Press correspondent Amir Shah contributed to this report.

     I did see a videoclip of Rahman being interrogated by his Islamist prosecutors; the videoclip is in Dutch which I don't understand, but Rahman's facial gestures and demeanor do not convince me that he is a Christian.

     Why, oh why, did he return to Kabul after having lived nine years in Germany? That was crazy. And why should we expect that Rahman would be able to practice his faith in safety, knowing that Afghanistan is still controlled by Islamists? Afghanistan may be a democracy, but it is certainly not a liberal democracy because true individual liberty and sovereignty hardly exists. Afghanistan is 99% Muslim: in an Islamic-style democracy, the Sharia law prevails. Now if Rahman and his "fellow" Christians truly want to practice their faith in safety, they would either have to do it in caves or underground like the ancient Christians used to do, or feign their lunacy.