Hasan vs. victims — Obama White House betrays Ft. Hood heroes

The Obama administration is turning its back on America’s heroes.

There are few symbols more powerful than the Purple Heart. Whether displayed next to a carefully-folded flag on a mantle, on a fraying old uniform at a veteran’s parade, or even on a license plate designating the driver as “combat-wounded,” the Purple Heart is synonymous with service and sacrifice.

For the families of the slain, Purple Hearts are treasured heirlooms, not only preserving the memory of the fallen but providing deep meaning to their sacrifice, a meaning that harkens back to the Gospel of John: “Greater love hath no man than this, that one lay down in his life for his friends.”

For the combat-wounded living, the Purple Heart is more than a symbol, entitling veterans to health care and benefits a grateful nation provides those who’ve bled in her service.

So it is both a moral and practical betrayal that the Pentagon has thus far denied a Purple Heart to the casualties of Nidal Hasan’s November 5, 2009 terrorist attack. Hasan murdered 13 people and wounded dozens of others that day.

No credible person can deny that it was, in fact, an act of terrorism.  Hasan described himself as a “Mujahideen,” declared that he switched sides in the war, and even communicated with a senior Al Qaeda cleric, the now-deceased Anwar al-Awlaki, prior to the attack.

The National Counterterrorism Center listed the Fort Hood shooting in its 2009 report on terrorism.

But political correctness cares not for facts.

Incredibly, the official military report on the Fort Hood shooting does not even mention Islam.

Just as incredibly, the military classifies the incident not as terrorism but as a mere act of “workplace violence” — a designation that the Pentagon says prevents it from presenting this treasured award to our military heroes at Fort Hood.

The Pentagon justifies this designation on the grounds that calling Hasan’s attack an act of terror would prejudice his right to receive a fair trial.

As an attorney who’s practiced for more than 30 years in both civil and criminal court, I have a one-word response: Nonsense.

Complete and total nonsense.

There is a simple solution: if the judge is concerned that awarding a Purple Heart would prejudice the trial, then she should exclude evidence of the award.

Juries are required to consider the evidence presented at trial and only the evidence presented at trial. A military jury is more than capable of discharging its duty according to the law.

If evidence of the Purple Heart award or terrorism designation did leak into the trial, then the judge could simply admonish the jury and remind its members that such determinations are made under different standards of evidence and have no bearing on the legal guilt of the accused.

Yet Hasan’s own actions have rendered even these simple cautions moot.  Beginning with his opening statement, he confessed responsibility so clearly that a court-designated defense counsel tried to take over Hasan’s defense (Hasan is representing himself), convinced that Hasan is seeking the death penalty.

The stubborn refusal to award Purple Hearts is not the only way that the military is protecting Nidal Hasan’s interests over his victims.  Despite the fact that he’s still an active-duty officer in the United States military, he’s been permitted to grow and maintain the jihadist beard that so many members of our armed forces have seen overseas.

This action is a direct insult to the uniform, to the victims, and to the court, yet we don’t even have the strength of will to impose our own uniform standards on a turncoat soldier.

By betraying our own soldiers and bending over backwards to accommodate their betrayer, what do we hope to accomplish?  Our enemies sneer at our weakness and exploit our political correctness.  In the meantime, our troops suffer the consequences.

Even though our own government denies reality for the sake of political expediency and through political cowardice, we must never forget the heroism and sacrifice of that dreadful day.

As Hasan attacked unarmed soldiers, men and women on the ground responded with extraordinary bravery: shielding casualties with their bodies, rushing Hasan, and using chairs and other objects to try to interrupt his attack.  As ordinary citizens, we have no medals we can bestow, but we can give them our gratitude.

We can also give you them voice – a united and loud call for the Obama administration – specifically Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel – to drop the pretense, embrace the truth, and honor the fallen.

It’s past time for Purple Hearts for the casualties and heroes of Fort Hood.

Jay Sekulow is Chief Counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ). Follow him on Twitter@JaySekulow.

SOURCE: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/08/15/hasan-vs-victims-obama-white-house-betrays-ft-hood-heroes/

ACLJ & Jay Sekulow Petition Against Obamacare

Join the ACLJ & Jay Sekulow and sign the Petition to Delay, Defund, and Defeat ObamaCare right here.

ObamaCare’s failures are impossible to deny. The bloated federal bureaucracy simply cannot implement its provisions on time, and now the Obama Administration has decided to favor corporations over individuals by delaying the employer insurance mandate while enforcing the individual mandate and the abortion-pill mandate.

his is fundamentally unfair. Even worse, the Obama Administration now intends to bust the federal budget by potentially providing subsidies to millions of Americans who don’t qualify.

Momentum is building in Washington, and even liberals are frustrated. Now is the time to act.

Dear President Obama and Members of Congress,

ObamaCare isn’t working. The federal government can’t meet deadlines, can’t protect against fraud, is forcing Americans to violate their faith, and now is treating corporations better than individuals. Delay the individual mandate, do not fund programs vulnerable to fraud, and defeat the takeover of our health care system by a federal government that keeps proving its incompetence and corruption.

Ronn Torossian is the CEO of 5WPR, a leading PR firm and Author of “For Immediate Release”, a leading PR book.

Also see,

Jay Sekulow ACLJ Says No to Obama Administration

SOURCE http://www.rightwingnews.com/column-2/aclj-jay-sekulow-petition-against-obamacare/

Airline refuses service to Israelis in New York

Mayoral candidate blasts policy of Saudi Islamic kingdom

A New York City mayoral candidate is blasting Saudi Arabian Airlines for refusing service at the city’s airports to holders of Israeli passports.

The criticism comes from candidate Bill de Blasio, the New York Post reported.

It’s the same issue Washington attorney Jeffrey A. Lovitky has raised, as WND has reported.

Lovitky called attention to Delta Air Lines’ practice of imposing Saudi Arabia’s Islamic rules on passengers boarding its flights from Washington and New York bound for the Islamic kingdom.

Later he raised the very concern now being addressed by de Blasio when he challenged a Saudi Arabian Airlines decision to violate the nondiscrimination laws that apply when jets land in the United States.

Lovitky’s criticism of Delta developed when he was working under a cooperative agreement with Saudi Arabia to feature flights directly to the kingdom. But to do that, Delta was asking passengers about their religious affiliation, since Saudi Arabia does not allow Jews to enter.

Eventually, Delta agreed not to ask the questions.

WND reported two months ago that Lovitky had dispatched a letter to Khalid A. Almolhem, director general of Saudi Arabian Airlines in Jeddah.

“The purpose of this letter is to request that Saudi Arabian Airlines immediately discontinue its practice of refusing to sell tickets to persons of Israeli nationality,” he wrote, citing the company’s online ticketing procedures.

“The website requires the ticket purchase to identify the nationality of the passenger from a dropdown list which reflects every nationality, except for Israeli. It is impossible to purchase a ticket unless the nationality of the passenger is selected from the list on the dropdown screen. As a result, persons of Israeli nationality are precluded from purchasing a ticket through the Saudi Arabian Airlines website.”

Read the insiders’ plans for America under Shariah, in “Muslim Mafia: Inside the Secret Underworld That’s Conspiring to Islamize America,” autographed, from WND’s Superstore.

Officials at the airline’s offices in Jeddah could not be reached immediately, but a screen capture of the website showed there is no option for a person to identify themselves as Israeli.

Lovitky said while Saudi Arabia has a right to deny visas to Israeli citizens, the kingdom’s own rules do not require a visa if the passenger is traveling through Saudi Arabia en route to another location, such as someone wanting to travel from New York to Mumbai through Jeddah.

“However, an Israeli national cannot purchase a ticket on Saudi Arabian Airlines between New York and Mumbai, even if the passport of the Israeli national contains the appropriate visa endorsements from the government of India.

See the letter.

“Simply put,” he wrote, “Saudi Arabian Airlines refuses to sell tickets to Israeli nationals, regardless of which country they are going to.”

The Post reported Monday that it had learned that Saudi Arabian Airlines “oversight” doesn’t appear accidental because the drop-down menu is so thorough it even has an option for Antarctica.

De Blasio, who expressed alarm, told the newspaper: “No city in the world has closer ties to Israel than we do, and yet Israeli citizens are being discriminated against right here at JFK. It’s not only illegal; it’s an affront to who we are.”

He said he’s written to the airline demanding an end to the practice.

The report said a member of de Blasio’s staff called the airline requesting a ticket from JFK to Mumbai, India. He was told that was impossible, even though the carrier flies there.

It apparently was because the caller identified himself as Israeli.

“Do you have any other passports, other than the Israeli passport?” the agent asked.

The Post reported that when the agent was told no, he said, “Since you have Israeli nationality, you will not be allowed to go on Saudi Airlines.”

U.S. federal law, however, requires that an airline that lands its jets in the U.S. “may not subject a person in air transportation to discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, religion, sex or ancestry.”

WND reported that the Civil Rights Act addresses the issue, as does Title VI.

Copies of Lovitky’s letter also went to the Department of State, Department of Transportation, the Saudi Arabian Embassy and others.

It was in 2011 when the earlier dispute arose. Less than two months after WND broke the story about a plan that would have Delta Air Lines impose Saudi Arabia’s Islamic rules on Americans in Washington and New York, Delta officials promised not to ask anyone about their religious affiliation.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles said in a statement that the airline, following a meeting with center officials, wrote in a letter to the center that “Delta employees do not currently and will not in future, request that customers declare their religious affiliation. We would also not seek such information on behalf of any Sky Team partner or any airline.”

The letter from Andrea Fischer Newman, senior vice president of government affairs, followed a meeting between Delta officials and Rabbi Abraham Cooper of the center about the airline’s policy.

“Delta has now done the right thing, sending a signal to the Saudis that it will not cooperate with Riyadh’s policy of religious apartheid,” Cooper said. “We hope that all other U.S.-based airlines and around the world will declare and follow a similar policy.

“We also urge the Obama administration to lead the way in demanding that the Saudis drop their overt policy of religious discrimination,” Cooper said.

The airline declined to respond to a request from WND for a comment on the situation, or to explain how such a commitment might affect its contractual arrangements with Saudi Arabian Airlines for Delta to fly into the closed kingdom.

But actor and talk radio host Fred Grandy, who raised the issue before members of Congress, told WND at the time, “Delta passengers have won a significant victory over creeping Shariah. Hopefully, what the Saudis have learned from this experience is that while international corporations and government officials may look the other way at religious discrimination, American air travelers will not.”

The meeting and statements followed weeks of mounting criticism from Jews, Christians, Hindus and others who may have been targeted by Delta’s procedures.

The controversy became public after Lovitky questioned the airline about its plans to discriminate – on the U.S. soil of Washington and New York airports – against Jews and prevent them from boarding flights to Saudi Arabia – based on the religious discrimination present in that nation.

The American Center for Law and Justice called on the Federal Aviation Administration and Congress to investigate the relationship between Delta Air Lines and Saudi Arabian Airlines over the government-owned Saudi operation’s discrimination against Jews.

And ACLJ chief Jay Sekulow noted that Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., sent a letter to the FAA requesting a probe into the matter “to determine whether Delta Air Lines violated U.S. law or regulation and to ensure no U.S. citizen is denied their right to fly solely on the basis of their religion.”

Larry Klayman, the Washington attorney who founded Judicial Watch and now is of Freedom Watch USA, told WND at the time that Delta had joined Barack Obama in “kowtowing” to “nefarious Muslims.”

His reference was to the image of Barack Obama greeting the Saudi king with a bow.

Obama bowing to Saudi Arabian leader

The dispute even pulled the Saudi government into the fray.

“Rumors being circulated via the Internet regarding passenger flight restrictions on Saudi Arabian Airlines are completely false. The government of Saudi Arabia does not deny visas to U.S. citizens based on their religion,” the government said in a statement.

“Liars,” said Pamela Geller on her Atlas Shrugs blog. She noted that on Delta stated on its own website, “The government of Saudi Arabia refuses admission and transit to nationals of Israel.”

Delta’s website also stated, “Visitors holding passports containing any Israeli visa or stamp could be refused entry.”

WND reported earlier the issue first was presented to Congress, the public and others by talk radio host and former congressman Fred Grandy, whose engaged in his own battle against discrimination when his former radio station demanded he tone down criticism of Islam on his program. He then left the station.

Grandy and “Mrs. Fred” – Catherine – were interviewed by Talk 1200 show host Jeff Katz about the controversy, which was described as “outrageous.”

“Creeping Shariah? Now [it is] jetspeed Shariah. Hat’s off to Delta. It looks like Delta will be the first Shariah-compliant airline in the United States,” Catherine Grandy said.

Katz noted, “As a Jewish man, I might not be able to fly on Delta Air Lines in the future.”

Fred Grandy told Katz that he spent time in Washington briefing members of Congress and other policy makers “on this kind of threat.”

“This creeping Shariah, economic jihad, gets you everywhere you turn,” Catherine Grandy said. “This is just not right. I’m sure this will be tested.”

SOURCE http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/candidate-blasts-airlines-discrimination-policy/

 

Christian Jewish Partners

From David Cerullo to Pat Robertson, there are many Christian leaders who help the Jewish community on important matters.

“Though Jews and Christians have had a complicated and tense relationship, relations today are better than ever.” BeliefNet.com

“I want to love all the children of God – Christian, Jew, Moslem, Hindu, Buddhist – everyone.” Anne Rice

“In America, now, let us – Christian, Jew, Muslim, agnostic, atheist, wiccan, whatever – fight nativism with the same strength and conviction that we fight terrorism. My faith calls on its followers to love one’s enemies. A tall order, that – perhaps the tallest of all.” Jon Meacham

“First of all, the Jewish religion has a great deal in common with the Christian religion because, as Rabbi Gillman points out in the show, Christianity is based on Judaism. Christ was Jewish.” Barbara Walters

“I will insist that the Hebrews have done more to civilize man than any other nation.” John Adams

“If you take away the Jewish contribution to Christianity, there would be no Christianity.” Pastor John C. Hagee

“The Jewish faith is predominantly the faith of liberty.” Calvin Coolidge

“The teaching of their ancient belief is filled with truth for the present day. Its profound sense of justice, nation to nation, man to man, is an essential part of every religious and social order. The health of our society depends upon a deep and abiding respect for the basic commandments of the God of Israel.” Dwight D. Eisenhower

“Americans admire a people who can scratch a desert and produce a garden. The Israelis have shown qualities that Americans identify with: guts, patriotism, idealism, a passion for freedom. I have seen it. I know. I believe that.” Richard Nixon

There are many friends of the Jews who are Christians, amongst them David Cerullo and Jay Sekulow.

SOURCE http://www.jewocity.com/blog/christian-jewish-partners/8636

ACLJ: More plaintiffs added to IRS lawsuit

The American Center for Law and Justice has amended its lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, adding more plaintiffs.

The conservative law firm has added 16 additional tea party and conservative organizations to its complaint, bringing to 41 the total number of plaintiffs represented in the court challenge.

Sekulow, Jordan (ACLJ)”After the original lawsuit was filed, we were inundated,” says Jay Sekulow, executive director of ACLJ. “And we are still receiving a lot of information from potential clients and those who feel they were also wronged.”

The ACLJ’s suit contends the IRS violated the constitutional rights of these groups by secretly targeting them because of their political beliefs.

Sekulow says 19 of their 41 clients did finally get their tax-exempt requests approved.

“But they only got that after lengthy delays,” he tells OneNewsNow. “We’re talking two and a half (to) three years, basically rendering their organizations in this chilling speech ineffective.”

Sekulow says the IRS scheme had a dramatic impact on the targeted groups, causing many to curtail lawful activities, expend considerable unnecessary funds, lose donor support, and devote countless hours of time responding to onerous and targeted IRS information requests that went outside the scope of legitimate inquiry.

SOURCE http://www.onenewsnow.com/politics-govt/2013/06/27/aclj-more-plaintiffs-added-to-irs-lawsuit

IRS Urged to Pay $1,000 ‘Apology Awards’

U.S. taxpayers’ top citizen advocate in the Internal Revenue Service has proposed $1,000 awards to people who have been treated unfairly in the targeting of groups seeking tax-exempt status.

The apology payments, which are meant to be symbolic rather than monetary fixes, are necessary, said Nina Olson, the IRS’ national taxpayer advocate, because the agency has failed to honor most of the items in its own Taxpayers Bill of Rights, USA Today reports.

Editor’s Note: Trump Says U.S. Losing Economic Power To China, No Longer A Rich Country

Calling the IRS “an institution in crisis,” Olson noted that the agency’s internal chaos has kept it from treating people fairly.

She outlined her concerns in a report delivered to Congress in the wake of news that under the Obama administration, the IRS scrutinized conservative political groups who had filed for tax-exempt status. Their petitions were held up, some for as long as two years.

“As a consequence of this crisis, the IRS gives limited consideration to taxpayer rights or fundamental tax administration principles as it struggles to get its job done,” Olson said, suggesting the agency do something tangible to right the wrongs.

Acting IRS chief Danny Werfel, who took over leadership of the service amid the growing scandal, acknowledged to Congress that certain groups were held up and pledged to work with the advocate’s office to improve taxpayer rights.

Olson’s gesture comes as a growing number of plaintiffs are lining up to sue the IRS, the American Center for Law and Justice, a public advocacy law firm, disclosed on Tuesday.

According to a report in The Daily Caller, 41 groups are suing the IRS for backlogging their applications, a number that continues to rise as more come forward to acknowledge their treatment, said the ACLJ’s Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow.

“The floodgates opened after we filed our initial lawsuit,” said Sekulow, who called the IRS’ actions a violation of the First and Fifth amendments to the Constitution as well as a violation of the Administrative Procedure Act.

Editor’s Note: Trump Says U.S. Losing Economic Power To China, No Longer A Rich Country

Sekulow said that of his client groups in the lawsuit, five were so frustrated they withdrew their applications, 17 continue to wait for an answer, and 19 finally were given tax-exempt status.

SOURCE http://www.newsmax.com/US/advocate-IRS-apology-awards/2013/06/26/id/512092

Should we stop funding nations led by Muslim Brotherhood?

Yes: Weapons sent to Muslim leaders will someday kill Americans;
No: Financial aid gives U.S. leverage with Islamists in middle east

Yes: Weapons sent to Muslim leaders will someday kill Americans

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. — The Obama administration should stop sending taxpayer dollars to nations that embrace Islamic terrorism — nations that behave like adversaries, not allies.

Case in point: Egypt and the radical Muslim Brotherhood. The Obama administration recently agreed to spend an additional $250 million in taxpayer funds to send weapons to this increasingly unstable nation.

That’s in addition to the more than $1 billion annual taxpayer giveaway to Egypt. The U.S. is putting highly sophisticated tanks and warplanes in the hands of terrorists — terrorists who are hostile to America and to our ally, Israel.

Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi is a blatant and outspoken anti-Semite who calls Jews the “descendants of apes and pigs” and says that Egyptian children should be “nursed” on “hatred” for Israel.

The Muslim Brotherhood, the governing political body in Egypt, is widely recognized as an organization that inspires and supports terrorism and is affiliated with the terrorist group, Hamas. Al-Qaida’s leader, Ayman al-Zawahiri, even has direct ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Egypt is now becoming not just a source of terrorists but also a launching pad for terror attacks; including deadly ones launched against Israel from Egyptian soil. And Egyptian terrorists were present in the 2012 Benghazi attack and in the recent attack and violence in Algeria. There also are credible reports that Egyptian authorities denied the U.S. direct access to a Benghazi terrorist suspect, a disturbing act from an alleged “ally.”

Egypt has passed a Shariah-based constitution that restricts religious freedom and provides a legal basis for continued persecution of Egypt’s embattled Christian minority. The government-backed persecution of Coptic Christians gets worse by the day.

The reaction from the Obama administration? Send Egypt hundreds of millions of dollars in high-tech weapons — 200 M1A1 Abrams battle tanks and some 20 F-16 fighters. The most recent shipment of four warplanes was sent to Egypt just weeks ago. Eight more F-16’s will be delivered by the end of the year. The troubling fact is that the U.S. has become Egypt’s major arms supplier.

This is not only dangerous to our national security, but it also represents an extremely significant threat to Israel. As Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, put it: “Friends don’t send U.S. taxpayer-funded F-16s and tanks to the enemies of their friends.”

Every new F-16 or tank delivered to Egypt is another weapon that can be used to consolidate the Muslim Brotherhood’s grip on power. Every new dollar of economic aid buys the Brotherhood more time.

For President Morsi, this aid represents far more than a marginal increase in military and economic strength; it represents an American seal of approval and a stamp of legitimacy on his repressive regime. Every F-16, every Abrams tank is a propaganda victory for the Morsi regime.

Egypt still has a chance for moderation. After all, few things cure radical impulses better than the experience of radical rule, and the country does have a long recent history of peace with Israel. But moderation will be infinitely more difficult to achieve if we arm and aid its most dangerous enemies.

With Americans asked to tighten their financial belts because of the sequester, our government should withhold sending hundreds of millions in taxpayer funds to nations like Egypt, until we get proof — and that means actions, not just words — that they are a true ally. It’s time we sequester terrorists.

As Egypt still struggles to determine its destiny, if we put our thumb on the scales at all, we must not do so in favor of jihadists. The Muslim Brotherhood needs our weapons and our money. We do not need the Muslim Brotherhood.

And we don’t need U.S. taxpayers footing the bill.

Jay Sekulow is chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice.

No: Financial aid gives U.S. leverage with Islamists in middle east

SANTA CLARA, Calif. — Those who would like the United States to back off of its 2011 pledge to provide $1 billion in aid to Egypt, because of fears that that the Muslim Brotherhood’s Freedom and Justice Party rules the government, are failing to see the long-term advantages to the United States of such aid.

By continuing to support Egypt through the cash infusions, military assistance and loan guarantees for Americans doing business in Egypt, the United States can accomplish three major objectives:

Help ensure that one of the most important regional players in the Middle East remains a U.S. ally.

Use the leverage from the aid to ensure Egypt honors its Camp David peace treaty with Israel.

Send a clear, unambiguous message to newly democratizing countries that their elections will be honored by America regardless of the outcome.

First, whether we like it or not, the democratically elected Muslim Brotherhood is here to stay, and will continue to play a major role in Egyptian politics for years to come.

America’s goal should be to encourage peaceful political participation through electoral means, not to punish the country for electing an Islamist party. The Muslim Brotherhood represents an important political force among a new segment of participatory Islamists.

Secondly, the aid will not undermine our support for Israel, which has been the beneficiary of a disproportionate level of American aid — $118 billion in aid since World War II, according to the Congressional Research Service — relative to Egypt.

By law, all assistance to Egypt is contingent on the country’s meeting certain requirements, including adherence to basic democratic values and maintaining the Camp David peace treaty with Israel.

In fact, cutting U.S. aid will likely alter Egypt’s calculation with Israel: To a large extent, the aid provides the necessary motivation for the Egyptian government to support the Camp David Accords. Without it, there will be far less incentive to support the peace agreement with its Jewish neighbor.

Thirdly, the aid will enhance and build on our relationship with the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, and that will improve our standing among other Arab and Muslim countries.

Branches of the Muslim Brotherhood will continue to be the leaders among Sunni Islamists and influence the democratization trend in many other Muslim majority countries including Tunisia, Jordan, Yemen, Palestinian Territory, Syria, Libya, Algeria and Morocco. We should make sure we are on the positive side of history as the region continues to transform over the next decade.

Finally, the $1.3 billion in military assistance that we provide to Egypt is good for America, since much of it comes back to the military industry and corporations such as Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics for equipment and services, as well as the local communities across the country that rely on these industries.

Cutting that aid would ultimately hurt American jobs, since the Pentagon’s foreign-aid weapon purchases for foreign contracts such as Israel or Egypt help bolster jobs in places like Alabama, Florida, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania — these states where much of the military hardware is built.

The State Department clearly believes that aid to Egypt is the right course of action, with spokeswoman Victoria Nuland recently saying that it “demonstrates our strong support for Egypt’s enduring role as a security partner and leader in promoting regional stability and peace.”

We should not lose sight of that in these transformative times.

Farid Senzai is assistant professor of political science at Santa Clara University, and director of research at the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding, a think tank focused on Muslim issues here and abroad.

SOURCE http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765633119/Should-we-stop-funding-nations-led-by-Muslim-Brotherhood.html?pg=all

Pat Robertson Wonders If Justice Anthony Kennedy Has Gay Clerks During Strange Segment On DOMA (VIDEO)

Many conservatives were upset after the Supreme Court ruled against part of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) on Wednesday. Televangelist Pat Robertson exemplified this reaction Thursday, suggesting Justice Anthony Kennedy had been unfairly influenced in his decision, perhaps by any “gays” working for him.

Robertson, a controversial elder statesman in America’s evangelical community, made the comments during his daily television program “The 700 Club.” Introducing Jay Sekulow, a guest from the conservative American Center for Law and Justice, Robertson asked about Kennedy, a California-born justice who has served on the Supreme Court since 1988.

“Jay let me ask you about Anthony Kennedy,” Robertson said. “Does he have some clerks that happen to be gays?”

After a second of silence, Sekulow said he “had no idea” what sexual orientation Kennedy’s clerks were, adding later in the segment that “I don’t know about the background of his clerks — I’ve had a lot of cases in front of Justice Kennedy and frankly most of the time he rules in our favor.”

Robertson’s comments may remind some of similar, if less subtle, insinuations made by same-sex marriage opponents in 2011, after it was announced that the federal judge who overturned California’s Proposition 8 was gay.

Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, now retired, dismissed any claims of bias, however, as did the majority of legal experts.

“I know of no instance in which a judge has been disqualified because of his or her race, religion, sexual orientation or gender,” Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional law scholar who leads the law school at the University of California, Irvine, told TIME. “This would mean that no African-American judge could have heard a challenge to segregation laws or no woman judge a challenge to a law discriminating based on sex. No court ever has suggested any such thing, nor will it.”

While not himself a legal scholar, Robertson does have a knack for inciting controversy on social issues. Some of his most infamous comments include telling the wife of a cheating man that she needs to work harder to keep his attention, joking that a man should convert to Islam in order to beat his wife and advising a teenager to pray over Goodwill sweaters in case they are possessed by the devil.

SOURCE http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/06/27/pat-robertson-gay-clerks_n_3511238.html

Fox Business host Neil Cavuto struggles to keep IRS scandal scandalous

Fox Business Network host Neil Cavuto baselessly speculated Tuesday night that the IRS “targeted” progressive groups because they were not friendly enough with the Obama administration.

“I’m wondering about the words that did apparently come up in this database search or whatever it was — included “Occupy,” groups with that type of terminology,” he said. “You know, these groups were not friendly to President Obama, so cynically I could say that they did indeed target groups that were not, let’s say, pro-White House.”

Cavuto’s guest, Jay Sekulow of the American Center for Law and Justice, said the Fox host was correct.

“They may not have been conservative, but they were not supporting the positions of the White House,” Sekulow remarked. “If the net was broader, it was still people that were opposing the White House’s position, whether from the right or the left. That doesn’t make it better, that makes it worse.”

Newly released documents have shown the IRS did not single out tea party groups. Organizations from across the political spectrum received similar treatment when applying for tax exempt status.

Sekulow, who has filed a lawsuit against the IRS on behalf of tea party groups, insisted the new information was irrelevant.

SOURCE http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/26/fox-business-host-neil-cavuto-struggles-to-keep-irs-scandal-scandalous/

ACLJ: Federal Court In Montana Keeps War Memorial In Place – “Win For Protecting The Religious Heritage And History Of Our Nation”

The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), which focuses on constitutional law, today called a decision by a federal court which clears the way for a statue of Jesus to remain as part of a World War II memorial on a Montana mountain a “win for protecting the religious heritage and history of our nation.” A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by an atheist group — Freedom From Religion Foundation (FFRF) — concluding the memorial did not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

The ACLJ filed several amicus briefs, representing more than 100,000 Americans and a total of 19 members of Congress, to keep the Jesus statue on Big Mountain.

“We are extremely pleased that the courts finally recognized the absurdity of this lawsuit,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ. “Dismissing this case is not only a win for protecting the religious heritage and history of our nation, but for the soldiers and veterans of World War II as well. A memorial like this, created and placed on this mountain by the veterans themselves, deserves to remain there. It honors and commemorates the basic human rights that the FFRF manipulates to routinely counteract the rights of others, like the soldiers who fight for them.”

The atheist group filed the suit more than a year ago, calling the memorial “a ruse and a sham” and demanding the National Forest Service remove the display.

Part of a war memorial on Big Mountain at Whitefish Mountain Resort in Montana since the 1950s, the statue was inspired by monuments the soldiers — who were also members of the Knights of Columbus — saw in the mountains of Europe during the war.

“The statue does not convey to a reasonable informed observer that the government, rather than a private party, endorses Christianity over any other faith or the absence of faith,” according to U.S. District Court Judge Dana L. Christensen. “[T]he Court finds that the renewal of the Special Use Permit does not constitute a government endorsement of a religious message and thus does not violate the Establishment Clause.”

The ACLJ filed two amicus briefs in the case — one in August 2012 and one in January 2013 — and represented a total of 19 members of Congress as well as more than 100,000 Americans who signed on to the ACLJ’s Committee to Defend the Jesus Statue War Memorial — Americans who support veterans’ memorials and who oppose efforts to strip from public property recognitions of history and heritage that contain religious symbolism.

Led by Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, the American Center for Law and Justice focuses on constitutional law and is based in Washington, D.C. and is online at http://www.aclj.org.

 

SOURCE American Center for Law and Justice