Freedom of Philadelphia

so long as the religion is Islam. I got this CAIR news article today, and in it it said that “Muslims won’t pay for foot baths”. At first glance that was no big deal, I won’t pay for em either I thought. Then I clicked the link and went to read the news article.

Muslims won’t fund footbaths

Leaders cite ACLU’s decision not to oppose use of public money for UM-Dearborn project.

Karen Bouffard / The Detroit News

DEARBORN — Muslim leaders in Metro Detroit have decided not to raise private money to pay for two footbaths at a local college campus now that the American Civil Liberties Union has said the plan doesn’t pose constitutional problems.

The University of Michigan-Dearborn’s plan to spend $25,000 on the footbaths was criticized on conservative blogs and radio shows this month. Critics said using public money for the project would violate the First Amendment, which says governments can’t favor or subsidize religions.

See the footbaths are needed to wash a muslims feet before he prays, because everyone knows that Allah hates stinky feet almost as much as he hates the Jews. What’s shocking here, well ok it’s not so shocking really is that the ACLU think that it’s fine for the taxpayers and students at UM-Dearborn to pay for the footbaths and for them to be installed on campus. They don’t see any infringement of “religion” at the school etc. In fact they use hygiene as the reason why they are staying out of it.

Kary Moss, director of the Detroit branch of the ACLU, said its review concluded the plan is a “reasonable accommodation” to resolve “safety and cleanliness issues” that arose when Muslims used public sinks for foot cleaning before prayers, which often spilled water on bathroom floors.

“We view it as an attempt to deal with a problem, not an attempt to make it easier for Muslims to pray,” said Moss, who likened the plan to paying for added police during religious events with huge turnouts.

Now, let me see if I get this straight. Cleanliness trumps religious infiltration into colleges. So, if a Reverend up in Michigan wanted UM-Dearborn to install a shower, so that people could rinse off before getting into a baptismal pool that would be ok? Of course not! The ACLU can not have “christianity” intruding into colleges, that would be obscene and against the separation of church and state.
What really burns me up here is this:

Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), said his group was concerned a public outcry would cause the university to back down from the project.

“If the ACLU had decided to take legal action against the UM-Dearborn, we probably would have called for the university to raise the funds privately, just so that the UM-Dearborn wouldn’t have to go through the trouble of having to defend its position against the ACLU,” Walid said.

So they were ready to pay for it themselves, but decided to stick the school with it because the ACLU backed down? Where’s the outrage by the ACLU? Once again they prove that they only want to go after religion if it’s Jewish or Christian, there’s no problem with the Islamification of our schools though right? Wonder why?
Once again follow the money, The Open Society Institute aka George “I wanna revolution” Soros funds both of them. Soros also funds the Tides Foundation which is also a large contributor to the ACLU AND CAIR. Oh did I mention that recently CAIR was unindicted co-conspirator for funding Hamas??

So to recap, Christianity or Judaism on college campuses bad according to people who take money from George Soros. Islamification of our colleges, good. What a crock, yet no one in the media will try to follow this money, no one in politics will cry out against it. Just brick by brick these people work on dismantling what is and was America.

For more on the Islamification of America going on now look here or here.

Last June I wrote here about a sleepy little town in PA called Hazelton that had stepped up to combat illegal immigration. They basically were going after the employers and the landlords that helped enable illegal immigrants to be here. Today over at Stop the ACLU I see this article.

City’s crackdown on illegal immigrants goes on trial

Now my first thought is, what good American is suing their city for not doing enough to stop the flow of illegal immigrants into this country. Then I realized that I was awake and 2007 America and that if any one was suing anyone it was probably someone from the liberal left concerned that we might be offending illegal immigrants.

But the American Civil Liberties Union and Hispanic groups, which filed suit against the city, call the measures divisive and racist and say they trample on the U.S. government’s exclusive power to regulate immigration

Of course the ACLU is suing. *in cheesy announcers voice* “Where ever a person, city, state, or business stands up for the ideals of America, we’ll be there to sue them and knock them down!” Seriously they are supposed to be the American Civil Liberties Union, not the illegal, broke into your country in the middle of the night and steal your identities and health care civil liberties union. Look if the ACLU wants to defend an American’s right to something then how about defending my right not to have my health care costs jacked up due to hospitals giving away free health care to illegals. How about defending the rights of citizens in the country from being watered down to include non-citizens.

Now of course the ACLU will just tell you that they are standing up for those who can’t stand up for themselves, and that Hazelton is just picking on an ethnic group. However, the excellent folks in Hazelton have a different reason for these new laws there.

In court papers, Hazleton said illegal immigrants have committed at least 47 crimes since last spring — including the shooting death of a 29-year-old man — consuming much of the city’s police overtime budget. Illegal immigrants were the subject of one-third of all drug arrests in 2005, and they have driven up the costs of health care and education, the city said.

You know instead of calling it the “Illegal Immigration Relief Act” maybe they should of called it the “Crime and Health Care Cost Reduction Act”. That might of been gentler and kinder while accomplishing the same thing. Now before any bleeding hearts wonder if the Hazelton police are goosestepping checking papers lets see how it works.

The city’s remedy, the Illegal Immigration Relief Act, would impose fines on landlords who rent to illegal immigrants and deny business permits to companies that employ them. The law empowers the city to investigate written complaints about a person’s immigration status, using a federal database. Ethnicity may be used as a basis for making a complaint, as long as it is not the sole or primary factor. *Emphasis mine-Logan*

I ask you, does that seem patently unfair, immoral, or unethical? Latino groups are in a tizzy because they feel that every Latino person will get investigated (waiting on the Muslim outcry myself, because thats who I’d want checked first).

“Every Latino will be a target,” said Cesar A. Perales, president of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, one of the groups filing suit.

Don’t think though that this is just the ACLU and some groups beating up on a small town in PA. This is about something much larger here.

“The significance of Hazleton is about stopping this anti-immigrant movement dead in its tracks.”

Stopping the movement dead in it’s tracks eh? See if they can win in Hazelton at the US District Court level, then they have “legal precedence” that can be used against just about any small town across the country that makes a stand. It also could effect any teeth in National Law. This is pretty disconcerting stuff here, it won’t make big news in the MSM because Hazelton is so small, yet those opposed to trying to stop illegal immigration realize the importance of what this precedent could mean. Please write/call/or email your state/national politicians about this issue. Immigration reform, in my honest opinion, is the 2nd largest issue facing this country today next to the global islamic jihadist movement.

This post is hard for me to categorize. I’m trying not to set up a category for Philadelphia politics, because truly if you don’t live here you would never believe nor understand that animal which is Philly politics. I saw this over at Stop the ACLU and it really struck me as funny, well maybe not funny considering the current state of Philadelphia government and city life. Here Philadelphia is in the throes of a city wide crime wave that is killing the next generation of cheesesteak loving, Eagles cheering, yo speaking citizens, and Mayor Street decides he wants to evict the 3rd largest Boy Scout Council in America.
The article starts off with this:

Mayor Street will evict the Boy Scouts’s Cradle of Liberty Council from its city-owned Center City headquarters, or make the organization pay fair-market rent, unless it stops discriminating against gays.

The Boy Scouts policy of not having homosexual scout leaders has been upheld in the Supreme Court of the United States in 2000, and the Boy Scouts National council reaffirmed it’s policy in 2003 so this isn’t a new thing for the Boy Scouts. Now I’m all for homosexual equal rights (bear in mind I said equal, not greater) but really isn’t there bigger isn’t there bigger issues right now for Mayor Street to deal with then the BSA? After all, the city is in the midst of a horrific crime wave that is claiming lives on a daily basis?
It seems that the Philadelphia government has decided to address “real issues” and ignore the mounting piles of bodies. All the while Mayor Street is playing his fiddle and the city that once was the birthplace of American Freedom is burning.
Times like this I miss Rizzo.

Saw this article and this post over at Stop the ACLU and had to toss out a little post on it. Seems the A(ll) C(ommunists) L(ove) U(s) has decided that the free speech of the Westboro Baptist church is something to be defended. You remember that church right? That’s the one that likes to protest at the funerals of soldiers, saying how God hates fags. Lot of other people will be talking about how uneven or even unhinged the ACLU is (they are unhinged) but what I want to talk about is the press coverage here.
The Washington Post had this headline on the article.

ACLU Sues for Anti-Gay Group That Pickets at Troops’ Burials

Now it’s kind of truthful but wouldn’t it of been more to the actual truth to say this

“ACLU Sues for Rights of Homosexual Hate Group”

That is more to the point.

They also had this paragraph

The American Civil Liberties Union filed the lawsuit Friday in the U.S. District Court in Jefferson City, Mo., on behalf of the fundamentalist Westboro Baptist Church, which has outraged mourning communities by picketing service members’ funerals with signs condemning homosexuality

Now that paragraph isn’t bad as far as the MSM goes, EXCEPT that Westboro doesn’t just “picket” and they just don’t use “signs”, what they do is scream obscenities and put hateful speech (i.e. God hate’s fags etc) on their signs. Now I’m all for free speech, and I utilize it quite often. However, these people aren’t protesting at a gay rights rally but at the funerals of SOLDIERS. If Westboro was protesting at gay rights parades or something I can see the free speech, but to protest at a soldiers funeral, which has nothing at all to do with what Westboro is against is stupidity in a high form.
Before you think that all the MSM is stupid I want to share with you this post I made with Julie Banderas of Fox interviewing someone from Westboro. I also want to re-ask the question would the ACLU defend this person? As a parting shot, I encourage everyone to show their support for the Patriot Guard Riders.

Ok, haven’t been posting too much lately. Work etc, not to mention all the crap going on over at dailykos and proteinwisdom. However, I saw this article today and wanted to toss a few thoughts out there on it. This article seemed really pertinent to me. See lately I’ve been debating the flag burning amendment with some conservative friends of mine. They say it’s fine to burn a flag and that any restriction on it is an assault on free speech. Me personally, I believe that people could find other ways to protest and that we should protect the symbol of our nation. After all, it wasn’t an ACLU charter that was raised over Iwo Jima, nor was it Clinton 08 poster that was raised at Ground Zero. It was a effing flag of our country. Now before you think that I am just gonna go off on a burn/not burn the flag tirade, I want to tell you what the link was about (cause I know that 3 outta the 5 of you who come here didn’t click the link). Here’s a snippet.

CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. The F-B-I will look into an online video that shows two men shooting a Quran with a military rifle and then leaving the bullet-riddled holy book at a Chattanooga mosque.

Seem’s some guy decided to excercise his right to free speech and protest.

The video shows the man purchasing a Quran at a bookstore, going to a wooded area and shooting the book, then throwing it on the ground outside the door of the Chattanooga Islamic center.

Now before anyone get’s crazy I totally am against and condemn this part

A man on the Web site identifies himself as “mully88″ and claims to live in Chattanooga. The author’s profile lists as heroes (quote) “anybody that has killed a muslim or at least tried to kill a muslim.” The site also contains slurs against Hispanics and blacks.

See what I find so funny is that we in America (especially groups like the ACLU and the liberal left) are so one sided in who or what they defend. Rights are only rights when they want them to be. How can any person or group be so vocal in defending the rights of one group that they trample on the rights of another? Talk amongst yourselves.That’s totally wrong, HOWEVER the FBI has no business investigating the Quran with the bullet hole part. Sure, check the guy out for hate crimes towards minorities. However, if he’s caught and any part of his charges involve shooting a hole in the Quran and tossing it outside a mosque, well then I gotta ask if the ACLU will be filing briefs on his behalf? After all, all he was doing was utilizing his constitutional rights to protest against Islam.

Now before any of you start to criticize me for defending hate speech against a religion, I have to ask this. Have you protested against those who bash the “zionist state” or defended Israels right to existence or just defended the pali’s who use children as shields and shoot rockets at townspeople day and night? Have you defended the right of a Christian valedictorian’s right to thank Jesus at her graduation speech or defended the school who cut off her mic even though the audience wanted to hear what she had to say? (this one is for the muslim readers) Have you condemned the Islamic Jihadists when they denied Tucker and Menchaca the right not to be tortured and have their bodies desecrated or defended the people who like to bomb Iraqi children because they took candy from an US soldier? Have you defended the rights of an unborn child before they get their brains sucked out or defended the right of a woman who got too drunk to have protected sex?

Sphere: Related Content