Category: Freedom Related

Freedom: the right to be left alone

Aptos, CA psychologist: Support Islamic mosque in your back yard? Guided by Shariah law? Think twice.

Best to learn about Islamic Shariah religious law before imposed on you in your local American community.

Our young president Obama supports the legal right of a mosque close to Ground Zero. Whether wise to do it so is an issue Obama side-stepped.

Broaden the question to do you want a mosque in your back yard? Or put differently: Do you want Islamic Shariah law to rule in your local community?

One reason not to embrace mosques and Islamic law: Islamic law per the Koran supports marriage between first cousins. So what?

Marriage between first cousins can cause severe birth defects. Islamic Law — read the Koran — permits such marriages.

The Koran explicitly says NO to marriage between an Islamic man and his mother-in-law (wow!) And NO to marriage between an Islamic man and his daughters (my goodness!), his sisters and the Islamic man’s nieces.

However, it is OK according to the Koran for an Islamic man to marry his first cousin. So what’s so bad about marriages between first cousins?

Jewish and Christian religious law views such marriages as wrong.

Why do religions forbid sex between persons related by blood? Sex between persons related by blood is taboo. Why? birth defects result.

And it is just inherently wrong for men to take advantage of women that men have easy access to : nurse mothers, their sisters, his nieces etc. And — sexual relations between persons related by blood — has been a NO for thousands of years.

Half of the U.S. states makes first cousin marriages illegal. Do you want Islamic law to change these U.S. laws? Think twice about this.

See the following article below for more information:

written by Cameron Jackson
DrCameronJackson@gmail.com

“With all the talk lately about American prejudice towards the Muslim world, it might be interesting to discuss one aspect of their culture. It should be a topic of real concern for all American women. Concerned for their “fellow sisters” in that world.

The following is excerpts from an article written by Nonie Darwish, a Muslim author and lecturer, describing the hell Muslim women face in a culture geared strictly towards men. Here is a portion of her description:

“In the Muslim faith a Muslim man can marry a child as young as one year-old and have sexual intimacy with this child consummating the marriage by the age of eight.

“The dowry is given to the family in exchange for the woman (who becomes his slave) and for the purchase of the private parts of the woman, to use as a toy. Even though the woman is abused, she cannot obtain a divorce.

To prove rape, the woman must have four male witnesses.

“Often after a woman has been raped, she is returned to her family and the family must return the dowry. The family has the right to execute her (an honor killing) to restore the honor of the family.

Husbands can beat their wives ‘at will’ and not have to say why he has beaten her.

The husband is permitted to have four wives and a temporary wife for an hour (prostitute) at his discretion.

The Shariah Muslim Law controls the private as well as the public life of the women. In the Western world (America), Muslim men are starting to demand Shariah Law so the wife cannot obtain a divorce. He can have complete control of her. It is amazing and alarming how many Muslim women now attending American universities are marrying Muslim men and submitting themselves and their children unsuspectingly to Shariah Law.

By passing this on, enlightened American women may avoid becoming a slave under this law.

She recently authored a book, “Cruel and Usual Punishment: The Terrifying Global Implications of Islamic Law.Ms. Darwish describes the goal of radical Islamists as a goal to impose Shariah Law on the world, “ripping Western law and liberty in two.””

Born in Cairo and spending her childhood in Egypt and Gaza before immigrating to America in 1978, Darwish’s father had been killed leading covert attacks on Israel. He was a high-ranking Egyptian officer stationed with his family in Gaza. When he died, he was considered a “shahid”, a martyr for jihad. Her father’s posthumous status earned Nonie and her family an elevated position in Muslim society.

Darwish developed a skeptical eye toward her own Muslim culture and converted to Christianity after hearing a Christian preacher on television.

While Westerns tend to think that all religions encourage some form of the golden rule, Sharia teaches two systems of ethics – one for Muslims and another for non-Muslims. Building on tribal practices of the seventh century, Sharia encourages the side of humanity that wants to take from and subjugate others.

Sharia advocates executing people who ask difficult questions that could be interpreted as criticism. Sadly, while talk of an Islamic reformation is common and even assumed by many in the West, such murmurings in the Middle East are silenced through intimidation.

The alarming fact is that there are many in America disillusioned with life and Christianity and willing to accept Muslims as peaceful. Many are, but there is a growing number that are willing to shed blood in the name of Islam.

Ms. Darwish contends there is a growing movement in this country willing to shed blood in the name of Islam. “While Americans are busy erasing Christianity from all public sites and erasing God from the lives of children, the Muslims are planning a great jihad on America.”

“It is something for every citizen of this country to pay heed as many attempt to marginalize the growing threat.

* If you have enjoyed this column, may I suggest you scroll to the top of this page and press the “SUBSCRIBE” Box? It’s FREE. For past columns, press the “RSS FEED” Box. Thank you for your patronage.

Share

First cousin marriages between British Pakistani a ‘tradition’? So says Deborah Gabriel

On the website People With Voices Deborah Gabriel writes concerning British Pakistani who marry first cousins.

Gabriel, working on a Ph.D. in journalism, criticizes fellow British journalist Ed West for using ‘inbreeding’ instead of ‘consanquinity’ to describe marriage between British Pakistani first cousins.

After faulting West, Gabriel goes on to use the word ‘ tradition’ in a misleading way. She says that wearing Burka and marriage between first cousins are best described as Pakistani ‘traditions’. I disagree. Gabriel describes human behaviors – clothing and marriage habits – that are largely guided by Islamic religious law.

What are traditions? Some Brits regularly eat yorkshire pudding with their roast beef. Some Americans regularly go to 4th of July parades. Those are traditions. No legal or religious sanctions attach to persons who do not do those activities.

In some countries — and possibly in certain areas of the U.S. and Britain — Islamic religious law guides most aspects of life including clothing, marriage and sex. And huge sanctions may attach for breaking Islamic religious law.

In Saudia Arabia last year Shiria law upheld selling an 8 year old child to a 50 year old man. In Afganistan, a couple was stoned to death for having sex outside of marriage Homosexualaity is a capital crime under Sharia law.

A favorite cookbook of mine is 1000 Jewish Recipes by Faye Levy, published in 2000. This cookbook has no recipes for pork. Is Ms. Levy a racist or acting in a discriminatory manner by not including pork recipes? No. My Jewish cookbook lacks pork recipes precisely because ancient Jewish religious law guides modern Jewish food habits.

Similarly, wearing Burka and first cousin marriages between British Pakistanis are not best described as Pakistani ‘traditions’.

These behaviors are guided, possibly controlled, by Islamic religious law. Yes, some Pakistani women may say that they choose to wear Burka in Britain. A choice in Britain or the U.S. is not a choice for women in other parts of the world.

I have heard it said that Islamic law affects all decisions people make. And we all know instances where things do not go well for those who break with Islamic laws.

A year or so ago, in Saudi Arabia a bunch of school age girls ran out of their school because it was on fire. The girls did not wear Burka. The girls were seized and thrown back into the burning building. The girls died because Islamic religious law caused some men to act that way.

Deborah Gabriel argues that first cousin marriages and wearing Burka by British Pakistanis are best thought of as ‘traditions’ and best dealt with similarly to the demographic shift in educated women to bear children later. She cites figures that older women age 40 have a 1% chance of having a Down’s Syndrome child. Pakistanis who are first cousins have a 6% chance of bearing a child with severe disabilities. If older women have choice to bear disabled children why not also British Pakistani who marry first cousins? The author uses medical authority for support for her view.

Does Gabriel think that Pakistani women who were bamboozled or intimidated into marriages have a real choice to say “No!” to more children with their first cousin husband? In general, Islamic women are very much second class citizens relative to the power and authority that Islamic men exert.

What will give real choice and freedom to British Pakistani women? Not having to do 24/7 total child care for severely disabled children is one way. And that way means knowing that marriage between blood relations is wrong for the children, wrong for society to pay the incredible expense and wrong for parents to bear the terrible grief.

If women know it is wrong then they will teach their daughters and sons that it is wrong.

I say to Deborah Gabriel, aspiring Ph.D. journalist, that she call a spade a spade. Use words accurately. Words are your craft as a journalist. Be precise with words.

Traditions are habits that people engage in by choice and desire. Traditions are not behaviors that must be done or sanctions may attach.

Gabriel may prefer the six sylable word ‘consanguinity’ to the word ‘ in-breeding’ but generally simple words say it best. ‘Related by blood’ says it simply and accurately.

First cousin marriages between British Pakistani is not a ‘tradition’. It is an unfortunate bi- product of ancient Islamic religious law.

The Prophet Mohammed had a number of wives. Five wives I believe. One marriage was consummated when the girl was age 9. Is that not child abuse? Another marriage was with a young woman whom he married the same day that he killed her father, brother and husband. How cruel can you get to deprive her of all close male relations? The Prophet in his personal behavior showed little respect for women.

With this kind of personal marital history — multiple wives with young girls and women taken through violence –probably the Koran condones behavior akin to what the Prophet did.

Back to author Gabriel’s assertion that marriage between British Pakistani first cousins is simply a ‘tradition’.

No, Ms. Gabriel. Read the Koran. Project Gutenberg has 3 versions of all verses. Book 4 verse 023 lists all persons a man is prohibited from marrying. The list is extensive including his mother-in-law and nieces. Not on the excluded list are first cousins. So, the religious law of Islam permits marriage by first cousins. This is not a ‘tradition’ — this is Islamic law.

From the Koran:

004.023 Y: “Prohibited to you (For marriage) are:– Your mothers, daughters, sisters; father’s sisters, Mother’s sisters; brother’s daughters, sister’s daughters; foster-mothers (Who gave you suck), foster-sisters; your wives’ mothers; your step-daughters under your guardianship, born of your wives to whom ye have gone in,- no prohibition if ye have not gone in;- (Those who have been) wives of your sons proceeding from your loins; and two sisters in wedlock at one and the same time, except for what is past; for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful;-

P: “Forbidden unto you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your father’s sisters, and your mother’s sisters, and your brother’s daughters and your sister’s daughters, and your foster-mothers, and your foster-sisters, and your mothers-in-law, and your step-daughters who are under your protection (born) of your women unto whom ye have gone in – but if ye have not gone in unto them, then it is no sin for you (to marry their daughters) – and the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins. And (it is forbidden unto you) that ye should have two sisters together, except what hath already happened (of that nature) in the past. Lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.”

Written 8-28-2010 by Cameron Smith Jackson drCameronJackson@gmail.com

Share

Aptos, CA psychologist: intermarriage by Islamic 1st cousins leads to children with serious defects

Who or what encourages Islamic fist cousins to marry?

In England, Islamic parents who are first cousins have horrific rates of serious birth defects. In England, it is hard to believe — but true — that one third (33%) of rare recessive gene defects are caused by a so few people (1.5 %). Is this Islamic culture or is it because of their laws?

See story below:

Tazeen Ahmad’s grandmother gave birth to six daughters and three sons. Five of the six daughters died and all three sons were born deaf. Why? Because of an unspoken tragedy which the Muslim world refuses to confront – intermarriage. Tazeen’s grandmother and grandfather were first cousins.

The consequences of intermarriage are that a disproportionate amount of children are born with massive birth defects. Tazeen Ahmad’s broadcast makes the case clearly: “..children of first cousins are ten times more likely to be born with recessive genetic disorders which can include infant mortality, deafness and blindness…British Pakistanis constitute 1.5 per cent of the population, yet a third of all children born in this country with rare recessive genetic diseases come from this community.” The cost of caring for children with birth defects is horrific, both emotionally and financially. Parents are reduced to prisoners in their own home caring night and day for their sick children; the strain doesn’t just affect the parents physically but emotionally. The most devastating thing in the world is to watch one’s children suffer. And the community in which these families live pays a high price as well – literally.

“On average, a children’s hospital will see 20 to 30 recessive gene disorders a decade, but one hospital in Bradford has seen 165, while British Pakistani children are three times more likely to have learning difficulties, with care costing about £75,000 a year per child.”

Yet, when Ahmad attempted to call attention to this horrific disaster, she met with a wall of resistance. Intermarriage is one of the tenets of Islam – ergo, to criticize intermarriage is to criticize Islam. And, as the Danish cartoonists discovered, that’s not such a good idea. When Ahmad approached 16 British MPs – all of whom had significant British Pakistani constituents – none of the MPs would go on the record. They were too afraid of the Muslim backlash. The Muslim community itself didn’t want to hear what she was saying – they also were afraid of offending the Muslim world by refusing to intermarry, even if it had bitter consequences for themselves as well as their children. Ahmad relates the all too typical tragedy of forced marriages. One young woman, “Zara” was blackmailed into intermarriage when her husband’s family in Pakistan “threatened suicide over loss of honour should she refuse to marry her cousin. She relented and lives in a deeply unhappy marriage.”

Nonetheless, Ahmad pressed on with the broadcast. She broke the wall of silence. It is hoped that her brave action will break the cycle of sick children. One can only hope.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1305078/TAZEEN-AHMAD-Three-uncles-deaf-Five-aunts-died-babies-Why-My-grandparents-cousins-married.html#ixzz0xkFWL0Ei

The greatest taboo: One woman lifts the lid on on the tragic genetic consequences of when first cousins marry
Sitting in the family living room, I watched tensely as my mother and her older brother signed furiously at each other. Although almost completely without sound, their row was high-octane, even vicious.
Three of my uncles were born deaf but they knew how to make themselves heard. Eventually, my uncle caved in and fondly put his arm around his sister.
My mum has always had a special place in her family because she was the first girl to live beyond childhood. Five of her sisters died as babies or toddlers. It was not until many years later that anyone worked out why so many children died and three boys were born deaf.
Today there is no doubt among us that this tragedy occurred because my grandparents were first cousins.
My grandmother’s heart was broken from losing so many daughters at such a young age. As a parent, I can’t imagine what she went through.
My family is not unique. In the UK more than 50 per cent of British Pakistanis marry their cousins – in Bradford that figure is 75 per cent – and across the country the practice is on the rise and also common among East African, Middle-Eastern and Bangladeshi communities.
Back when my grandparents were having children, the med­ical facts were not established. But today in Britain alone there are more than 70 scientific studies on the subject.
We know the children of first cousins are ten times more likely to be born with recessive genetic disorders which can include infant mortality, deafness and blindness.
We know British Pakistanis constitute 1.5 per cent of the population, yet a third of all children born in this country with rare recessive genetic diseases come from this community.
Despite overwhelming evidence, in the time I spent filming Dispatches: When Cousins Marry, I felt as if I was breaking a taboo rather than addressing a reality. Pakistanis have been marrying cousins for generations.
In South Asia the custom keeps family networks close and ensures assets remain in the family. In Britain, the aim can be to strengthen bonds with the subcontinent as cousins from abroad marry British partners.
Some told us they face extreme pressure to marry in this way. One young woman, ‘Zara’, said when she was 16 she was emotionally blackmailed by her husband’s family in Pakistan who threatened suicide over loss of honour should she refuse to marry her cousin.
She relented and lives in a deeply unhappy marriage. But others told me of the great benefits of first cousin marriage – love, support and understanding. To them, questioning it is an attack on the community or, worse, Islam.
At a Pakistani centre in Sheffield, one man said: ‘The community feels targeted, whether that be forced marriages or first-cousin marriages. The community is battening down its hatches, not wanting to engage.’
As a British Pakistani, I am aware of the religious, cultural and racial sensitivities around this issue and understand why people would be on the defensive when questioned about it.
At times I was torn between explaining the health risks while privately understanding the community’s sense of being demonised.
But I have also grown up in a family that has suffered the medical implications and strongly believe that people should have the choice to make an informed decision.
Throughout I had to remind myself that this is a health story – nothing more. It is not about religion or cultural identity. It is about avoidable suffering such at that experienced by Saeeda and Jalil Akhtar, whom I met in Bradford.
They are first cousins and have six children, three with the genetic disease mucolipidosis type IV. This stops the body getting rid of waste properly and affects brain functions controlling vision and movement.
Mohsin, their second eldest, is 17 and blind. He wanders aimless and helpless, often crying in frustration. His sisters Hina, 13, and Zainab, 11, have the same condition. They live in almost complete darkness.
Saeeda is worn down from years of round-the-clock care. She spoon-feeds them, dresses them and fears for them. Neither she nor her husband can quite accept that their familial link is the cause of this pain.
This is a major public health issue that has huge implications for other services. The cost to the NHS is many millions of pounds.
On average, a children’s hospital will see 20 to 30 recessive gene disorders a decade, but one hospital in Bradford has seen 165, while British Pakistani children are three times more likely to have learning difficulties, with care costing about £75,000 a year per child.
However during this investigation we found no efforts to introduce any national awareness-raising campaign. Why?
We approached 16 MPs with a significant number of British Pakistani constituents for interview – every one declined. We asked 30 MPs with a high population of British Pakistanis
in their seats to give their views in a short survey. Only one, who wanted to remain anonymous, responded, saying anyone who tried to talk about it risked being attacked politically.
A lone voice was Ann Cryer, former Labour MP for Keighley, near Bradford, who said ‘fear of being accused of racism or demonisation’ prevented politicians speaking up.
It is not just British Pakistani families who suffer. Wayne and Sonia Gibbs are white and first cousins once removed. They had no idea this could lead to problems. Their daughter Nicole had juvenile osteopetrosis, a genetic disease that causes the bones to thicken and crush the body’s organs. Nicole died aged two.
The couple now know both carry the recessive genes that caused Nicole’s illness. They wanted more children – but had genetic counselling first. They have two healthy boys today.
I have travelled nationwide, meeting doctors and families whose lives are full of pain. To me the solution is simple: Ring the alarm bells loud and clear.
In Birmingham, one GP practice has taken radical action. The doctors have campaigned heavily to stop cousin marriages. They have introduced genetic screening and testing for patients, starting at 16, and now claim that very few cousin marriages take place there.
My mother tells me that, long before I was born, her siblings and their cousins decided their tragedy would never recur.
The conclusion some will draw is that cousin marriages should be banned. I disagree. But people must be able to make informed choices about the risks involved and options available, be they genetic screening, counseling or carrier-testing.
At least there should be leaflets in doctors’ sur­geries and school campaigns.
Meeting the families in the program upset me greatly. Every day for them was an uphill struggle, mostly because their children needed so much help and this put enormous stress on their family lives.
Yet this was avoidable. If this were any other health issue, politicians would have been out in force. But they are silent and as a result children continue to be born with terrible, prevent­able disabilities that are devastating their lives and those of their loved ones.

Share

In the Wall Street Journal today (8-18-2010) there is an editorial about the class of civilizations. Worth reading twice.

You think that we all — the whole world — can get along if we just listen and try to share points of view? Sounds nice. That is the One World View

I do not share that view. I think, as stated today in the Wall Street Journal editorial article, that there is a real clash of civilizations going on right now. And what you do can affect that battle.

So — pick your side.I am for Western civilization as a far better alternative to Islam or Buddhist civilizations. Read the articles and speak up.

Cameron Smith Jackson, Ph.D., J.D. DrCameronJackson@gmail.com

Share

Obama an autocrat in substance?

Freedom of Assembly is guaranteed by Article 31 in the Russian Constitution. For the 9th time rallies in Russia were forbidden and broken up by force. And what is Obama’s response? The Obama Administration expressed its “concern”. Wow.

Per the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) editorial August 4, 2010 authoritarianism is rising in many places to endanger democracy. Which side is Washington on? Per the WSJ, the Obama Administration stance is “confused”.

The U.S. has cut support for democracy programs in Egypt. When Egypt extended its 29 year old state of emergency the State Department said nothing.

The story is the same in Latin America. Strong men now rule Venezuela, Volivia, Nicaragua, Equador and – of course – Cuba. The U.S. has pulled back support for civic society. And Washington’s response? Obama’s Administration has sought to engage the autocrats.

The Wall Street Journal titled its editorial A Democracy ‘Reset’. It ends with the comment, “How about an Obama freedom agenda?” Well, WSJ editorial writers, don’t hold your breath.

The WSJ forgets where Obama learned his values — in the pews of Rev. Wright’s church where Obama heard for 20 years how America is the cause of the world’s problems. Acts that weaken America abroad fit in with Obama’s agenda to return power to the disenfranchised. Democracy gives power to people. It is in Obama’s interest to engage the autocrats and turn a dim ear to the people ruled by autocrats.

So expect more headlines about beating up and arresting pro-democracy demonstrators. Obama is not interested in freedom or democracy. Obama wants to get rid of capitalism and free markets and substitute government control in its place. So who is the real autocrat in America? Autocrat Obama.

Share

Aptos, CA psychologist: Fraud against Gulf fishermen by one of their own?

Did a Vietnamese-American Texas attorney commit fraud when she signed up 1,000 Vietnamese fishermen in return for 60% contingency fees? Smells like fraud.

Roughly half of the 40,000 fishermen in the Gulf are Vietnamese refugees. Recently, one Vietnamese-American female attorney from a Texas law firm signed up over 1,000 of the refugees in exchange for 60% contingency fees. What explanation of the intricacies of the American legal system was individually given by that attorney to those 1,000 persons? What do you think that Vietnamese female attorney said? Probably something like, get a little now rather than wait a long time like in the Valdez spill?

“Before it became the single biggest environmental catastrophe in American history, BP’s Deepwater Horizon was a magnet for barracudas, which endlessly circled the oil rig in the Gulf’s warm waters, feeding on smaller fish. The oil plume and massive cleanup have driven away many of the underwater predators. But as a group of Vietnamese-American lawyers discovered before returning to the Bay Area from the Gulf of Mexico last week, the barracudas have come ashore.

“And they were carrying briefcases.

“About half the Gulf’s fishermen are Vietnamese-Americans — as many as 20,000 in all — and many of them have signed retainer agreements with attorneys who promised to help sort out BP’s complicated claims process, and represent them in any eventual lawsuits against the oil company. But because there is almost no cadre of Vietnamese-speaking professionals in southern Louisiana or Mississippi, the fishermen were easy prey for lawyers who see BP’s $20 billion escrow fund as a cash cow.

“Idled for months, the fishermen were unsure which way to turn. Those who agreed to sign waivers in exchange for compensation now would forfeit their right to sue BP. But lawsuits filed after the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska took decades to unwind, and in many cases resulted in relatively small payments. Without legal advocates, they had no way of knowing whether BP’s Vessels of Opportunity program — putting fishermen to work on the cleanup — was being implemented fairly.

Summoned to the Gulf Coast by the Mississippi Center for Justice to provide free legal counsel to Vietnamese fishing families, half a dozen members of the nonprofit Vietnamese American Bar Association of Northern California arrived in New Orleans expecting to be greeted warmly. But other attorneys — armed with contracts calling for contingency fees as high as 60 percent — had beaten them there, and left behind an almost impenetrable slick of hard feelings.

Lots of fear

When the pro bono lawyers conducted a town-hall meeting at the Mary Queen of Vietnam Catholic Church in New Orleans’ Ninth Ward, few fishermen showed up, and most of those that came sat in the back with their arms folded, just staring.

“We figured because we look like them and talk like them, they would accept the services we had to offer,” said Mai Phan, a San Jose immigration lawyer who grew up in New Orleans. “But when we got there, it was the complete opposite of what we expected. They were afraid of us.”

Afraid, and angry. “I’ve never seen a group have such a look of hatred in their eyes for attorneys,” said Ann Nguyen, an Oakland-based bankruptcy lawyer, who is VABANC’s vice president.

Two months into the mammoth spill, fishermen along the Gulf Coast have already missed one of the most promising shrimping seasons in years, and estimates of how long it could take for them to get their lines and nets back into the water range from two to five years. The Exxon Valdez oil spill left Alaska’s fishermen tied up in court for three decades.

The Gulf Coast is home to the largest Vietnamese-American population outside California, and yet, the lawyers who went from here to there discovered the two communities have little in common. Some were surprised by how little the fishermen had assimilated into American life. “They’re very different from the Vietnamese in our area,” Phan said. “Since they came to this country, all they knew is how to fish.”

“These people came from Vietnam as refugees, went straight there, and they’ve been stuck there in kind of a time warp,” said Nguyen. “There’s a huge lack of Vietnamese professionals down there.”

The entire fishing industry is imperiled, but immigrant fishermen — who essentially transplanted their way of life from Vietnam to the Gulf Coast — could be in double trouble. If their livelihood disappears, they could become refugees again, this time fleeing economic hardship rather than war.

Nguyen’s father was a fisherman on the Gulf when she was growing up, and Phan’s parents lost their home during Hurricane Katrina. “This is really emotional,” Phan said. “It’s only been five years since Katrina, and they were barely rebuilding their lives when this hit. Fishing was all these people knew, and now they’re really struggling.”

As the Bay Area lawyers’ three days in the Gulf went on, word began to spread that they weren’t trying to profit at the locals’ expense, and the number of fishermen seeking their help increased. When they returned home last Monday, both Nguyen and Phan said they cried — partly because of all the work left undone.

They’re working with the White House and Rep. Anh Cao, R-La., on a white paper covering many of the legal issues they encountered there. Phan said they are also raising funds to create a fellowship for a Vietnamese-language attorney or law student to work with the Gulf fishermen full time.

Shortly before she returned to San Jose, Phan encountered one of the attorneys whose name she had seen on many of the contracts requiring huge contingency fees. She represented a firm from Texas, and she was Vietnamese-American.

Basically, the Texas lawyer told Phan, “If you’re here to get clients, it’s too late. I’ve already retained over a thousand of them here. You’re on my turf.'”

When one of the pro bono lawyers told her she must have an enormous staff to zealously represent so many of her own people, the barracuda silently swam away.Contact Bruce Newman at 408-920-5004.

Share

How stop gang violence? Public commitment by families and swoop up the guns! And sports….

What can get a handle on gang violence? Healthy, supervised activities is one avenue. Other avenues include individual commitments by the youth and parents made publicly and supported by the institutions that they respect — school, church, neighbors.

Churches, for example, have Graduation Recognition ceremonies. How about Initiation for Peaceful Solutions Ceremonies for youth starting by age 9 that are renewed once a year? And to bolster that public commitment by youth and parents blessed by priests and ministers create safe communities that are gun/knife/weapon free. Encourage parents to create ways to swoop up the guns and weapons that are on the streets and in the hands of children. And yes — structured activities such as soccer that encourage cooperation and healthy competition will enhance self esteem.

Below is how Live Oak, California is addressing the problem of gang violence. It is a start!!

A Volunteer Opportunity
A FREE 6 week indoor Soccer Program for youth ages 6 – 17 is being offered on Monday and Wednesday evenings from 6:00 – 9:00pm June 14th – July 21st. at Shoreline School in Live Oak. It is offered through a partnership between the Sheriff’s Activity League, the Live Oak Family Resource Center, Communities Organized for Relational Power in Action (COPA) and the Live Oak School District. VOLUNTEERS (adults and older teens) ARE NEEDED – coaches, refs, line refs, security, “team parent” etc. There will be a volunteer training on June 7th 6-8 pm. For more information call 476-7284 x 104.
Pre registration for players is June 3rd. Priority to youth living in the Live Oak School District but all kids accepted on a space available basis. Call same # to find out how to register There are many kids living in our community who cannot play soccer because their families cannot afford it. This program promotes self-esteem, teamwork and leadership skills while offering healthy activities in a safe space.

Share

immigration reform possible? Yes!

How to solve illegal immigration?

Work to change the conditions that draw people here illegally. Too easily people can get fake identification papers. The Border Patrol too frequently turns a blind eye to people entering illegally. There is no fence along the southern border — though money was allocated for one. The federal government for too many years has done too little.

Hence Arizona’s sensible response. More needs to be done, however.

So let’s make sensible changes:

** Built rapport with law abiding groups across the Border. Have a foreign workers program and all workers carry tamper proof identification cards. Make a fence that is not easily penetrated and well maintained. Provide foreign aid to families and children that encourages families to stay and or return to Mexico and other Latin American countries.

** Built a solid fence with a 1/2 mile “no go” strip maintained by air planes, the national guard & border patrol. Physically fit persons paid by the government — like census workers — can walk the fence and be the eyes and ears for the national guard and border patrol. Use air planes equipped with laser tag guns, glow in the dark paint ball guns and other means of identifying persons that have illegally entered the U.S.

** Akin to the “go to the people & get their support” in Iraq and Afghanistan, use our military to “make friends” with law abiding citizens and groups in Mexico. What do they need/ want so their young people stay in Mexico and contribute to Mexico’s development? Give direct aid in small towns so they thrive and are pro-American and give us tips as to what the drug cartels are doing. Build rapport and support for law abiding behavior across the border.

** Remember that it is illegal behavior. Follow the laws that are already on the books.

** People are drawn here because of the freedoms we have as a lawful society. That’s what is wrong with amnesty every 10-15 years. Amnesty is a reward for bad behavior. Let’s reward legal behavior.

Share

are we safer now that Obama is President? The jihadists do feel safer!!

Let’s see. The Christmas Day bomber. He got Miranda rights. And the Times Square fellow who almost blew up the Square. He initially got Miranda rights. With a hem and a haw. And the Ford Hood psychiatrist that shot a bunch of fellow soldiers. As he was in the military I suppose he will — if able to stand trail – get a military trial. And there was a student who shot a couple of recruiters. Who else have I left out? All this in President Obama’s first year.

Do I feel safer now that Obama is President? Do you feel safer? Who should feel safer? Jihadists probably do feel safer!! With Miranda rights given to persons who commit domestic terrorism it will be many a year before their legal rights are exhausted.

Share

Aptos, CA psychologist: Boxer and Carly both full of hot air?

Choices for California: more of Boxer or…. ex-CEO Fiorina, Tom Campbell or Devore. Tom Cambell is a tax raiser. Fiorina failed as CEO. What about the other one?

Taxes are not the problem. We have to stop the politicians from spending.

See the following video. A bit heavy. I don’t care that Boxer only passed 3 bills in all those years. I do care that Boxer is a statist — always votes for more control for the government. She comes across as always right, haughty and not that smart. Her global warming ideas seem full of hot air.

So, if not Boxer — then who?