NunoftheAbove

The recently re-elected President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad must be feeling some nostalgia watching out his windows at the turbulence in the streets of Tehran.  Does he long for his Revolutionary Guard days and the bringing down of the old-guard as the streets burn and the bullets whiz?  Maybe he just wants to don the mask of a terrorist and join in just to get the old buzz again.  But then again, there is no embassy of the great Satan to take over, so he huddles behind his loyalists and multilayers of security.  My how things have changed — and that might be his undoing.

When the Muslim students attacked the embassy,  the newspaper was still the mainstay of most news buffs and satellite television was in its infancy.  With the first commercial television satellites only five years old, transmissions from the other side of the world were possible,  but there was many technical issues and logistics to consider.   Following the embassy takeover,  media, print and television, carried the story as their lead news story.  As is true with most news stories, interest in the hostage situation eventually waned as other national and world events took precedence.  One show, however, was to rise to prominence during the hostage crisis and bring a dramatic change in the way people get their information.

Looking back at this point in history it is amazing to realize the primitive nature that was the news media of the day.  There were no 24/7 news shows, no CNN, no Sirrus, no internet.  Most people didn’t know what a computer was much less be able to envision the way in which they would change the delivery of information.  There was, however, a new television program which premiered on ABC just days before the embassy takeover.  Nightline was a half-hour show that in an almost suicidal move went up against late-night television king, Johnny Carson.  ABC’s president, Roone Arledge, began to see the show as a way to capitalize on the public’s new found patriotism following the hostage-taking by offering updates on the crisis while at the same time not taking time away from his traditional nightly news program.  With the dramatic title, Iran Crisis, America Held Hostage, viewers could follow the unfolding of a news event on a daily basis.  Replacing the original host, ABC anchor Frank Reynolds, veteran ABC reporter Ted Koeppel began chronicling the Iranian incident and a producer had the idea of adding the number of days which had elapsed since the original takeover to the title of the program.  Although the hostage situation only last 444 days, the format for the show was set, and it was the predecessor to the plethora of news shows that have followed on both network, cable, and satellite television.

For Ahmadinejad, Nightline must have been a great ego boost.  For 30 minutes a day, he could enjoy the angst Americans were feeling over being bested by a group of radicals in a country most couldn’t even locate on a map.  What he might not have considered, however, was the reaction that was rising up from the Great Satan.  The embarrassment would quickly turn resolve and that resolve would turn to anger.  Possibly even more disgusting to the  Americans than the hostage-takers was the ineffectiveness seen in Washington’s ability to resolve the crisis.  And this wave of emotion would throw the hapless Jimmy Carter out and bring in the hawkish Ronald W. Reagan.

In the same way, a new wave is taking over Iran right now.  The protestors in the streets are by and large young people who are tired of the strict reins of the theocracy to which Admadinejad owes his power.  Attempts to eliminate the spread of information is not as easy as it was in 1979.  Tech savy and loaded with cash, the youth of Iran are broadcasting their rebellion faster and easier than could have ever been imagined when the Muslim students scaled the walls of the American embassy.  Twitter, camera and video phones, Skyping have not only spread the news of the rebellion within Iran but around the world as well.

It is too early to tell whether the current Iranian crisis will be succsuccessful, but it is for certain that in this fight technology is the first weapon of the protestors.  For Almadinejad who came to power through violence, it must the a cruel irony to see himself going down not because of superior firepower but superior thumbpower.

The History Of Flag Day

The Fourth of July was traditionally celebrated as America’s birthday, but the idea of an annual day specifically celebrating the Flag is believed to have first originated in 1885. BJ Cigrand, a schoolteacher, arranged for the pupils in the Fredonia, Wisconsin Public School, District 6, to observe June 14 (the 108th anniversary of the official adoption of The Stars and Stripes) as ‘Flag Birthday’. In numerous magazines and newspaper articles and public addresses over the following years, Cigrand continued to enthusiastically advocate the observance of June 14 as ‘Flag Birthday’, or ‘Flag Day’.

On June 14, 1889, George Balch, a kindergarten teacher in New York City, planned appropriate ceremonies for the children of his school, and his idea of observing Flag Day was later adopted by the State Board of Education of New York. On June 14, 1891, the Betsy Ross House in Philadelphia held a Flag Day celebration, and on June 14 of the following year, the New York Society of the Sons of the Revolution, celebrated Flag Day.

Following the suggestion of Colonel J Granville Leach (at the time historian of the Pennsylvania Society of the Sons of the Revolution), the Pennsylvania Society of Colonial Dames of America on April 25, 1893 adopted a resolution requesting the mayor of Philadelphia and all others in authority and all private citizens to display the Flag on June 14th. Leach went on to recommend that thereafter the day be known as ‘Flag Day’, and on that day, school children be assembled for appropriate exercises, with each child being given a small Flag.

Two weeks later on May 8th, the Board of Managers of the Pennsylvania Society of Sons of the Revolution unanimously endorsed the action of the Pennsylvania Society of Colonial Dames. As a result of the resolution, Dr. Edward Brooks, then Superintendent of Public Schools of Philadelphia, directed that Flag Day exercises be held on June 14, 1893 in Independence Square. School children were assembled, each carrying a small Flag, and patriotic songs were sung and addresses delivered.

In 1894, the governor of New York directed that on June 14 the Flag be displayed on all public buildings. With BJ Cigrand and Leroy Van Horn as the moving spirits, the Illinois organization, known as the American Flag Day Association, was organized for the purpose of promoting the holding of Flag Day exercises. On June 14th, 1894, under the auspices of this association, the first general public school children’s celebration of Flag Day in Chicago was held in Douglas, Garfield, Humboldt, Lincoln, and Washington Parks, with more than 300,000 children participating.

Adults, too, participated in patriotic programs. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the Interior, delivered a 1914 Flag Day address in which he repeated words he said the flag had spoken to him that morning: “I am what you make me; nothing more. I swing before your eyes as a bright gleam of color, a symbol of yourself.”

Inspired by these three decades of state and local celebrations, Flag Day - the anniversary of the Flag Resolution of 1777 - was officially established by the Proclamation of President Woodrow Wilson on May 30th, 1916. While Flag Day was celebrated in various communities for years after Wilson’s proclamation, it was not until August 3rd, 1949, that President Truman signed an Act of Congress designating June 14th of each year as National Flag Day.

Source

This was delivered on the 40th anniversary of D-Day.

A great organizaation to which to donate in memorial to veterans.

Also featured on today’s Fox News Sunday, the founder, Tom Day, as the “Power Player of the Week.”

Tomb of the Unknowns

The Tea Party Protesters of last week need to look no further than this country’s founding document to establish their legitimacy.  The Declaration of Independence empowers the citizens with the right to use whatever force is necessary to implement a government which governs with prudence and responsibility thereby protecting the rights of its citizenry.

None of the rallies called for the abolishing of our current government, but they all called for a government that is fiscally responsible and limited in size.

“The importance of these tea parties is to let our elected officials know that there’s a lot of people out there who are unhappy. They’re not Republicans, they’re not Democrats, they’re everyday Americans who are concerned about our taxes,” said said T.J. Welsh, an organizer of a protest attended by thousands in Jacksonville, Florida.

Financial-industry and automotive bailouts were launched at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency, but many demonstrators aimed their words and signs at the Obama administration, criticizing it in part for the recently passed stimulus package.

Protesters on Wednesday said that like their colonial forebears, they felt their voices were not being heard by their government.

Source

Like the Tories of colonial America, some people dismissed the protesters as insignificant and misquided. Speaker of the House, Nancy Peolsi (D-CA), disdainfully referred to the demonstrations as “astroturf” rather than “grassroots.” Reports of the size of the demonstrations were often diminshed while some reporters were openly hostile towards the participants.  CNN’s Susan Roesgen referred to the events as “anti-government and anti-CNN” and verbally chastised a middle aged man who was in attendance along with his 2 year-old daughter.  The video of this encounter quickly hit the internet with CNN quicklyresponding citing copyright claims and demanding the Youtube take it down.

Along with God-given rights, our Founding Fathers provided for an unfettered press to act as a watchdog to expose the errant acts of the government.  What they didn’t anticipate is a press which is a partisan supporter of certain politicians with which they share ideological camaraderie.  The MSM has become nothing more than an arm of the most liberal of the Democratic party.

Before there were Democrats or Republicans, there were men who believed in the ideals of democracy.  They envisioned a society with rights that were derived from God not from humans whose fickle, self-centered interest can be self-serving.  However in a political atmosphere in which for some God does not exist, how can those rights be perpetuated?

Two events, year apart marked days in American history where the citizens shed tears and shook their heads in wonder over the senseless loss of innocents.

In 1993, the 51 day standoff between the Branch Davidians and ATF forces ended in a fiery blaze that incinerated the compound leaving 76 people, including 2o children, dead.  Controversy has continued over which side actually started the blaze, but in the end, the loss and devastation shocked and saddened the nation.

Two years later, a car bomb manufactured by Tim McVeigh expoloded outside the Alfred P. Murrah Building in downtown Oklahoma City killing 168 people including 19 children most of whom were in a daycare on the first floor.  This act of domestic terrorism was the most deadly ever on American soil and many have seen as a direct result of McVeigh’s outrage at what he considered the government’s mishandling at Waco.

Incidents like those at Waco and Oklahoma City cause citizens to reexamine the actions of their government and the reactions of citizens to what they see as oppression within a democratic system.  Whatever the personal views regarding the responsibility of these two catastrophes, all can agree that such loss of American life is a inestimable tragedy.

The world is a dangerous place and no one can guarantee that either they or others won’t face a dangerous but unknown threat.  However, if Sentor Diane Feinstein (D-CA) has her way, at least one potential risk factor will be eliminated for American consumers.

The threat, a widely used chemical called bisphenol A.

BPA is used to create polycarbonate plastic products that are clear and durable. It’s also used in resins that coat the inside of many food and beverage cans.

Source

Feinstein’s proposal would ban the use of BPA because high doses have been linked to reproductive abnormalities and cancer in animals.

The proposal would ban BPA from food and beverage containers. Proponents say the precautionary principle requires such a ban because high doses of BPA can cause reproductive abnormalities and cancer in animals.

Scientists don’t know whether these low levels of BPA pose a health risk. So arguments about the proposed ban tend to involve discussions of precaution.

The precautionary principle dates back to at least the 1930s, says Jonathan Wiener, a professor of law, environmental policy and public policy at Duke University. He says there are at least three basic forms of the principle, though one scholar found 19 variations.

Weaker versions of the principle say it’s OK to take precautions against a threat to health or the environment even if it’s not clear that the threat has caused any harm. Stronger versions say it’s essential to take precautionary action.

The basis for Feinstein’s legislation, however, does not meet the criteria of any of the accepted versions of the principle because it calls for banning a substance not because it has proven to be harmful but because it has not been proven to be safe.

“If you do not know for certain the chemical is benign, it should not be used,” Feinstein said.

That standard is untenable — it is impossible to prove a negative.  No one can say that anything is perfectly safe.  Even water, taken in extreme quantities, can cause death.

Even supporters of the ban on BPA such as Dr. Ted Schettler, Director of the Science and Environmental Health Network,  disagrees with Feinstein’s rationale for banning the substance.

“They say the precautionary principle requires you to ban something if you have the slightest glimmer that it might cause harm,” Schettler says. “That is not what it does. It does ask you to look carefully, whether there are alternatives, and then look at the range of activities available to you.”

What is being mandated by this legislation is more of the misguided, over reaching of government regulation.  It won’t be long before citizens are told that they must stay in bed at all times because the world is a dangerous place and the only way they can be protected from some impending doom is to hide under their bedcovers until they die.

A two year-old Muslim girl is beaten to death.  The community cries out, but not for the loss of a child, but for the loss of the modesty of the alleged perpetrator.

East and West clash even in backdropped of murdered child

Ray Hanania

Earlier this week, a woman was arrested and charged with the murder of her two year old niece. The story itself is tragic enough, but on top of it are details of her religion. She happens to be Muslim in a region of Chicago where anti-Muslim and anti-Arab hatred has been notorious prevalent.

In this case, though, the woman, Nour Hadid, was charged with beating her niece by the Orland park Police Department. The police followed routine procedures and finger printed and also photographed for a standard police “mug shot” the accused suspect.

The victim was two year old Bhia Hadid and an autopsy concluded the child was beaten to death by blunt trauma. She had 55 bruises police and medical examiners concluded occurred over a four day period at her home.

The mainstream media carried the story, which is amazingly tragic on its face. Few mentioned that Nour Hadid is a Muslim or an Arab, although to those in the community the race and religion seemed obvious.

The mug-shot of the suspect showed the suspect with an expression of great pain and grief, like she was crying. There was nothing unusual in the picture. But this morning, Nour Hadid’s husband accused the Orland Park Police of “discrimination,” arguing that his wife was innocent and had her religion disrespected because she normally wears a Hijab, or head covering.

Removing the Hijab and forcing his wife to pose for the picture and then making the picture public, he alleges in several media interviews, violated her rights as a Muslim and depicted her in a disrespectful manner.

Is it really racism? Should the debate be focused on whether or not the accused woman was in fact the victim of discrimination, which the Orland Park Police denied claiming they followed the same procedure for Nour Hadid as they do for all suspects?

Or, is the real story the tragic death of the two-year old girl. Beaten to death, according to the autopsy report?

There was no outrage over the death, but there have been many calls and emails complaining that Nour Hadid’s rights were violated. The incident has also drawn the ire of conservative media fanatics who have blasted the husband and who are using the discussion as a basis to foment their continued anti-Arab and anti-Muslim hatred.

According to the media, Nour’s husband, Alaeddin Hadid said Orland Park police are “really going to be in big trouble” for releasing the woman’s booking photo to the news media after she was charged with first-degree murder. He continued that Nour, who is Muslim, “never leaves the home without covering up.” He vowed to file a lawsuit. He asserted, “It [being shown without your hijab] is against our religion; we do not do this in our culture.”

One Muslim activist is quoted in the media saying that the police would not have been so disrespectful to a Christian Nun. The constant comparison of Muslim women who wear a Hijab and Christian Nuns is a constant argument used to support charges of anti-Muslim bias in this country. But are the two really relevant?

Another said it was disrespectful, adding that she looked like she was in her “underwear.” The photo showed Nour Hadid from just below her shoulders upwards. Her arms were crossed over her chest which was not visible.

The comment regarding the nuns is especially offensive to Christians – mainstream Christians and Arab Christians, too – as it was made on the eve of Good Friday as Christians around the world prepare to celebrate Easter (this Sunday for mainstream Christians and next Sunday April 19th for Orthodox Arab Christians).

The fact is that a Nun is not just any woman who observes her religion and wears a head covering, called a “Habit.” In fact, they are official members of the Catholic Church and represent the Catholic Church in official capacities, working at Churches. The “Habits” are obligated by specific Church doctrine to be worn at all times.

Some Muslim women wear a Hijab, which is not to be confused with the oppressive “berqa.” A Hijab is a head and hair covering, similar to the coverings worn by Orthodox Jewish women and very conservative Christian women, too. A “berqa” is a full body covering that also includes the covering of the wearer’s face, which is offensive and reflective less of religious belief and more of male arrogance and domination over women, and not just Muslim women, but Jewish and Christian women too, who are often as easily enslaved in gender-driven oppression.

But the husband asked in the media, “Would they do that to a Nun?” Would they force a nun to remove her Habit off her face to pose for an official criminal identification photograph called a “mug shot?”

The answer is yes. Nuns arrested and charged in crimes have been photographed for mug shots without their head coverings, too. The mug-shots are not private either because police agencies are public institutions. That means that the mug-shot is a legitimately issued public domain property. The public has a right to know who is charged and alleged to be involved in a criminal offense, especially offenses of such heinous nature.

Is Nour Hadid guilty or innocent? Too often in America, Arabs and Muslims are guilty until proven innocent. That was in fact the policy of this country for the past eight years after Sept. 11, 2001, when 19 terrorists who happened to be Muslim, became the poster children of the anti-Muslim and anti-Arab conservative fanatics and mainly Christian zealots in this country.

Nour Hadid is innocent until proven guilty. But is this an incident of discrimination? I don’t believe so. The Orland Park police were simply following procedure in events that were out of their control. A woman is accused of murdering a two year old child.

It’s the murder of the child that is really the significance in this matter. In the face of such atrocities, some – I repeat some — individual rights must be sacrificed, especially those rights with which have to do with identification.

You cannot permit anyone accused of a crime to hide behind their religious observance. The real tragedy is that the crime, whether Nour Hadid is innocent or guilty, imposes on us a vigilance that must place the need to determine the truth as our cumulative priority.

Let’s determine who did or did not kill baby Ghia Hadid. Everyone should be ready to make a personal sacrifice for that.

– Ray Hanania
www.RadioChicagoland.com

Admininstrator’s Note:  It is the policy of this blog not to post the picture of ANY perpetrator unless the person is being sought by authorities.  The mugshot of Noura Hadid is available on other sites and can be viewed by any interested parties.