Tag Archives: civil rights

New China UFO Sighting Over Leshan City, Sichuan China

According to chines media report on July 26, 2010 citizens of Leshan City saw a Triangular UFO in the sky around 10 A.M. Three round illuminated discs shined in the sky, lasting for more than 10 minutes before disappearing. Professor Wang Sichao, from Purple Mountain Observatory of Chinese Academy of Science, said the identity of those discs still can't be determined before comprehensive analysis. added by: current_spider

Ariz. Sheriff Threatened with Justice Dept. Suit – CBS News

The Justice Department on Tuesday notified an Arizona sheriff's office known for its efforts against illegal immigrants that it has refused to cooperate with a civil rights investigation, is not in compliance with federal law and the department is threatening to sue. Since March 2009, the U.S. Justice Department has been investigating Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio's office in Phoenix for alleged discrimination and for unconstitutional searches and seizures. Arpaio says the inquiry is focused on his immigration efforts. Robert Driscoll, a Washington lawyer representing Arpaio, said Justice Department lawyers “have picked the man and the department and are trying to find a violation, rather than find a violation and then seeking to vindicate someone's rights.” “They have been investigating for two years,” said Driscoll, who added that most people assume it has something with racial profiling. But Driscoll said, “If it was going on now, presumably they would have evidence of this now.” In a letter, assistant attorney general Thomas Perez, head of the Justice Department's civil rights division, said the sheriff's office is not turning over material that Perez's lawyers are requesting. Over a year ago, Arpaio's lawyers asked that the Justice Department's Office of Professional Responsibility investigate alleged attorney misconduct regarding the investigation. In his letter to Arpaio's lawyers, Perez said such “unfounded allegations” are not a basis for refusing to cooperate with the Justice Department probe. In June, the office concluded that no civil rights division attorney at the Justice Department committed professional misconduct or exercised poor judgment in the probe of Arpaio's office. Perez gave the sheriff's office until Aug. 17 to turn over documents first requested last year in what the department calls an inquiry into claims of discrimination based on national origin. Arpaio and his legal counsel said a year ago that the sheriff's office would not cooperate with the inquiry. The office “has continued its unwarranted refusal to cooperate,” Perez wrote. In June, the office supplied a position statement regarding the operation of its jail facilities. The statement says “nothing at all about the allegations of discriminatory police practices,” and includes no agreement to provide access to sheriff's office facilities and personnel, Perez said in the letter to the sheriff department's legal counsel. The letter also said a limited production of accompanying documents fails to respond to the first request for material made 17 months ago. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination in federally assisted programs on the basis of race or national origin. Perez pointed out that the sheriff's office signed contractual assurances under Title VI agreeing to allow examination of relevant records by the Justice Department. The Title VI implementing regulations require that every application for federal financial assistance be accompanied by an assurance that the program will be conducted in accordance with all requirements. added by: toyotabedzrock

MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer Lobbies U.S. Politicians to ‘Stand Up’ for Gay Rights

MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer on Monday appeared baffled as to why more U.S. politicians weren’t ‘standing up’ to demand the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” touting it as “a civil rights issue.” In the span of two hours, the cable network featured a gay member of the military and a conservative to discuss the issue. It was hardly a case of hearing two sides, however. Both guests favored allowing gays to serve openly. Talking to Richard Grenell , a former spokesman for Ambassador John Bolton, Brewer editorialized, ” It is a civil rights issue…Is it time for our American leaders to stand up for what’s right and no matter what public opinion polls say to have the leadership and the courage to take a stand on it? ” Earlier, Brewer cited a survey sent out to service members asking them questions such as whether they’d be comfortable showering with an openly gay individual. The cable host dismissed, “Now, substitute in the word black or Jewish and would that question to service members ever be okay?…Why aren’t more American leaders itching for a fight on gay rights?” At the end of the segment, Brewer read viewer e-mail on the issue. Two such messages favored repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. These she recited without comment. When she read a letter disagreeing with gay rights, Brewer could hardly disguise her opinion: “Carolyn Bramblett says, “Homosexuality is a sin issue, not a civil rights issue.’ Well, you know what Jesus said: ‘Let he who is without sin.'” In the 11am hour, MSNBC featured openly gay veteran Daniel Choi to dismiss the survey. Grenell is also gay. So, the network hardly sought out a variety of voices on the subject. A transcript of the segment, which aired at 12:43pm EDT, follows: 12:20 tease CONTESSA BREWER: Another traditionally safe [makes quotes marks] constituency for Democrats also angry, this time over a survey about the potential repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, many say has incendiary and homophobic language. The President said he wants Congress to repeal the law and Pentagon is in the process of studying the issue. But, a new survey sent out to service members asks questions that many find offensive. So, here’s the problem: Critics say the survey assumes a position of homophobia. For instance, here’s one of the questions: “If Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is repealed and you are assigned to bathroom facilities with open bay showers with a gay or lesbian service member, would you take no action or use a shower at a different time?” Now, substitute in the word black or Jewish and would that question to service members ever be okay? This is a pivotal civil rights issue. My big question today: Why aren’t more American leaders itching for a fight on gay rights? You can share your thoughts on Twitter, Facebook. You can get me on e-mail. Contessa@MSNBC.com We’re going to have a lively discussion about this in the next half hour. 12:43 BREWER: A new Pentagon survey is stirring up the controversy because it asks very pointed questions about Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Some groups even suggest the survey uses homophobic language. 400,000 members of the armed forces got the question via e-mail asking questions about living with gays and using the same showers and same-sex couples in military housing.  The Pentagon is defending the questions. Rick Grenell is a conservative columnist, former spokesman to John Bolton and three other U.S. ambassadors and believes Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell should be repealed. We knew that the survey would happen. Claire McCaskill, actually, Rick, brought up her concerns about how the questions would be framed. When public policy pollsters conduct surveys to gain credibility and validity they have to formulate truly open ended questions. Do you have a problem with these questions? RICHARD GRENELL: Well, I think the key to this is having questions at all for a civil rights issue. What’s most surprising is President Obama and Nancy Pelosi that they are actually trying to say that this isn’t a civil rights issue, because clearly by having a questionnaire, they’re not so sure themselves. And I think the troubling thing for me and for a lot of conservatives is that they campaigned on this issue, that it was a civil rights issue and they were elected, they would end this. You know, when Barack Obama was a senator, he spent a lot of time telling people that it should just be taken care of with an executive order. Now that he’s president, the executive order excuse goes away and he’s blaming Congress. So, I think it’s really a difficult issue for the Democrats and they campaigned like it was an easy issue. BREWER: So, to drive this point home and it’s the argument that I made further, that if you put in instead of same-sex or homosexual and used, say, black, here would be the way the sample question would read. “If a wartime situation made it necessary for you to share a room, birth or field tent with someone you believed to be- insert here black- service-member which are you most likely to do?” And goes on to how you take action. You’re right. That question to service members would never be considered. And, in fact, when they integrated the military, my understanding is there was no general survey taken to see how service members would feel about it. It was done because it was the right thing to do. That being said, after I asked my big question today, Rick, I got a bunch of E-mail responses in. And you have people, viewers here who are writing and arguing that it’s not a civil rights issue because being born black is not a choice but being born gay is. GRENELL: Well, look, what I would say there is I’m a conservative. I think it’s outrageous that we are spending so much money, $4.5 million alone on this survey to investigate someone’s personal life. Whether you believe this is a choice, whether you believe that someone is born gay, I think it goes to the question of why are we wasting so much money to go after someone’s personal life, to investigate? It’s a national security issue when you’re encouraging people to actually lie. I’ve held a top secret security clearance. They want to know everything about you. They want to know that you’re truthful. BREWER: Right. GRENELL: At the end of the day people have to remember that individuals in the military are already showering with gay military folk. BREWER: And, again, regardless of what you think about homosexuality as an issue, that is like arguing you get to choose what region you are as an adult and you still can’t discriminate on the basis of that. I agree with you fully. It is a civil rights issue. Let’s talk about the leadership here. Is it time for our American leaders to stand up for what’s right and no matter what public opinion polls say to have the leadership and the courage to take a stand on it? GRENELL: Well, I agree. I think, yes, the answer is a definitive yes. However, it’s outrageous to me that this has been dragged through the political sphere. The Democrats are raising money off this issue. They want it to be a political issue. They are making this a political issue. They are choosing to make this a non-civil rights issue. They want this issue to go into the fall. They want to raise money and they want to make sure that Americans are constantly talking about this issue. And I think that that’s outrageous. BREWER: Rick, thank you so much for joining us. I appreciate your time. I appreciate you weighing in. A lot of folks have been weighing in online about why our nation’s leaders aren’t embracing gay rights as is civil rights issue. Clinton Hancock responds, “The politicians are too fearful of their constituents. Sometimes you have to teach your constituents, not just listen to them. Carolyn Bramblett says, “Homosexuality is a sin issue, not a civil rights issue.” Well, you know what Jesus said: Let he who is without sin. Paul Heimsath writes, “It’s 2010, people. This should not even be an issue.” You can reach out to me. Let me know your thoughts.

More here:
MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer Lobbies U.S. Politicians to ‘Stand Up’ for Gay Rights

Dude, Where’s My Discrimination? Jake Tapper Notes Lack of Discrimination Charge in Arizona Lawsuit

He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing Importance, unless suspended in their Operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. — Thomas Jefferson, The United States Declaration of Independence. Oops! So what happened to all that discrimination and violation of civil rights that the Arizona immigration law was supposed to cause? Apparently the federal government decided it was so lacking that they didn’t include it in their lawsuit against the Arizona law. Jake Tapper of ABC News notes the distinct lack of a discrimination charge in the federal lawsuit: As widely anticipated, Attorney General Eric Holder today filed a lawsuit against Arizona and Gov. Jan Brewer over the state’s immigration law. The suit seeks a preliminary injunction to stop the law from being implemented. The court filing states that Arizona law is pre-empted by federal law and therefore violates the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution. The filing makes no assertion that the law is discriminatory or risks being applied in a discriminatory fashion, as the president and other officials said they feared would be the case. Interestingly, this suit makes no civil rights charges against the Arizona law. Huh? So what was all that liberal thunder about how discriminatory the Arizona immigration immigration law supposedly is? Apparently the U.S. Justice Department was unable to find such discrimination to use in its lawsuit. Instead, the federal government is taking the King George III approach when the states attempt to enforce laws neglected by the Crown, oops, I mean the Obama administration. The Associated Press also notes the embarrassing lack of a discrimination charge in the federal lawsuit: PHOENIX — The federal lawsuit against Arizona’s tough new immigration law focuses heavily on a question that has been in the spotlight repeatedly the past decade and dates back to the Founding Fathers: The right of the government to keep states from enacting laws that usurp federal authority. The lawsuit filed in Phoenix federal court on Tuesday sidestepped concerns about the potential for racial profiling and civil rights violations most often raised by immigration advocates. Experts said those are weaker arguments that don’t belong in a legal challenge brought by the White House to get the measure struck down. Weaker arguments? You can bet that if discrimination could have been detected in the Arizona immigration law, it would have been front and center in the federal lawsuit. So how are other MSM outlets handling the very notable lack of a discrimination charge in the federal lawsuit against Arizona? Very gingerly. The Washington Post article on this lawsuit is an example. The embarrassing absence of any discrimination charge is only mentioned towards the end of the story: Although the lawsuit cites potential “detention and harassment” of U.S. citizens and immigrants who do not carry identification documents, it declines to make a legal argument that the law would lead to racial profiling. But a senior Justice Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that if the law takes effect, “we will monitor it very, very closely, and if we become aware of any racial profiling or civil rights violations, that’s something that we would take action on.”  Shh! Let’s not focus on the lack of a racial profiling charge in the federal lawsuit against Arizona.

The rest is here:
Dude, Where’s My Discrimination? Jake Tapper Notes Lack of Discrimination Charge in Arizona Lawsuit

Open Thread: NAACP Praises Former Klansman, Opponent of CRA, VRA

In the organization’s defense, someone obviously misinformed its leadership on the late Sen. Robert Byrd’s staunchly anti-civil rights voting record . On Monday the organization released a statement from NAACP President and Chief Executive Benjamin Todd Jealous claiming that Byrd’s life “reflects the transformative power of this nation.” Jealous goes on to say that Byrd, who once asserted that it was an affront to dignity to ask white men to serve alongside blacks during World War II, “went from being an active member of the KKK to a being a stalwart supporter of the Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, and many other pieces of seminal legislation that advanced the civil rights and liberties of our country.” A stalwart supporter of the Civil Rights Act? Not only did Byrd vote against the Civil Rights Act of 1964, he filibustered it for almost three months. He also opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Thoughts?

Visit link:
Open Thread: NAACP Praises Former Klansman, Opponent of CRA, VRA

‘Half Pint’ Brawler: I’m A Midget, Get Over It

A wee wrestler on Spike TV’s ” Half Pint Brawlers ” thinks the whole stink by a civil rights organization over the word “midget” is a little ridiculous.

William Hung picture American Idol

Former #39;American Idol#39; contestant William Hung arrives for the 9th season finale of #39;American Idol#39; in Los Angeles May 26, 2010. Every year, “American Idol” begins with an array of auditions, and not all of the hopefuls are memorable because of their talent. The May 26 Season 9 finale saw the return of General Larry Platt, a 63-year-old civil rights activist who reprised his original “Pants on the Ground” from auditions in Atlanta. Platt was joined in the finale by another familiar

Read the original:
William Hung picture American Idol

Mike Shanklin On Rand Paul & Civil Rights Act/Financial Reform Bill – Anarchy Time Radio

5/23/2010 Mike Shanklin made a special appearance on Anarchy Time Radio to discuss the recent Rand Paul/Maddow Interview concerning the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and racism as a whole. The discussion then leads into the Financial Reform Bill that Congress is currently trying to pass. added by: shanklinmike

Guess Who Said No to Celebrity Rehab?

If you’re a celebrity actor or actress, porn star, retired NBA player, retired professional wrestler, former child actor, former American Idol contestant, son of a Grammy-winning singer/songwriter, model, civil rights figure, or were at any time a member, session musician or roadie for Guns N’ Roses… and you have a substance abuse problem, now is your chance to jump on the Celebrity Rehab bandwagon! Dr. Drew Pinsky is casting the fourth season of his VH1 reality show and so far, all of the big, tabloid-headlining “users” he wanted to treat on camera, have turned him down. Which A and B-list stars could have been the next Jeff Conaway?

Read more:
Guess Who Said No to Celebrity Rehab?

Benjamin L. Hooks, Civil Rights Leader, Dies at 85

As reported in Associated Press, Benjamin L. Hooks, a golden-tongued orator who led of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People for 16 years, died Thursday at the age of 85. The civil right leader Benjamin Hooks died at his home in Memphis, following a long illness said by the State Rep. Ulysses Jones, a member of the church where Mr. Hooks was pastor. > > Read More Benjamin L. Hooks, Civil Rights Leader, Dies at 85 is a post from: Daily World Buzz Continue reading