Too Hot to Fly? No, Just Too Obnoxious

Sure, these young ladies may be considered attractive, and now they've got their 15 minutes of fame.

Still, they need to come down to earth and lose the attitude.

It all started on Valentine's Day when two Florida teenagers were escorted off a Tampa-Los Angeles flight and met by authorities. That's about all that the teens and the airline can agree on.

The two 18-year-old girls, Nisreen Swedberg and Sarah Williams, have suggested they were too pretty and that the Southwest flight attendants didn't like them. They said they had been banned for life from Southwest flights.

"I think they were just discriminating against us because we were young, decent-looking girls. I mean, nobody else really on the plane looked like us except us," Ms. Williams told a Tampa TV station.

Mindful of the Kyla Ebbert debacle of last summer, Southwest struck back Tuesday with a written statement and a YouTube.com video statement denying that the two young ladies were targeted for anything but bad behavior.

Southwest spokeswoman Brandy King says in the YouTube video that the airline couldn't ban someone for life "even if we wanted to." The claim that the airline kicked them off for being too pretty is "simply not true," Ms. King said.

"We would be out of business if we banned pretty people from flying Southwest Airlines," Ms. King said.

The two girls "were using vulgar language, aggressive behavior and threatening gestures at 30,000 feet," she alleged.

Pretty is fine. "Just leave your bad behavior at home," Ms. King concluded.

Read the rest.

Here's the video.


Update: Hot Air has Too hot to fly III: Southwest strikes back

BBC Producer Linked to 'Osama bin London' But Failed to Help Police

We noted Tuesday the conviction of this piece of garbage know as Osama bin London and now we revisit the BBC producer who had contact with him but felt no obligation to alert the authorities. Last time we checked in with Nasreen Suleaman, she and the Beeb were busy extolling the virtues of paintballing with terrorists.

A BBC producer failed to give police information that would have helped track down the July 21 bombers, the trial was told.

Don't Panic, I'm Islamic, which featured the group paintballing and an interview with Mohammed Hamid, was shown on BBC2 on June 12, 2005.

Nasreen Suleaman, the producer, told the court that Hamid said he would use his £300 fee to settle the fine he had been given by magistrates for racially abusing two policemen at his Oxford Street stall.

Called as a defence witness, Miss Suleaman admitted that she had spoken to Hamid in the days following the July 21 attacks and found out he knew the wanted men.

So what does any good citizen do at this point? Well, you should contact police, any prior relationship be damned.

But Suleaman is an exalted journalist, those most noble of all creatures, and their profession (ahem) comes first.

Miss Suleaman claimed she told BBC managers of the situation but no one passed on the information to the authorities.

She looked visibly shaken when told that two of the July 21 bombers, had joined Hamid on another paintball trip two weeks before the bombings.

Miss Suleaman saw Hamid a few days after July 21, 2005 and he seemed "very shocked that the men he knew were accused of this".

Duncan Penny, prosecuting, said: "Did you tell him to go to the police?"

Ms Suleaman replied: "I don't think I needed to."

Despite this, BBC kept Suleaman on the payroll to offer up sympathetic dreck like this and this months after the bombings.

Some journalist.

The Moonbats of London

The loonies are on the loose in London.

LONDON (Reuters) - Protesters breached tight security at Britain's parliament on Wednesday, getting on to the roof and unfurling banners protesting against government plans to expand London's Heathrow airport.

One of the banners hanging down the side of the building read "NO THIRD RUNWAY", while another read "BAA HQ", referring to the British Airports Authority which owns Heathrow. BAA is itself owned by Spain's Ferrovial.

So why do these goofballs think this was the right thing to do?

"This major breach of security is overshadowed by (Prime Minister) Gordon Brown's breach of climate security with these expansion plans," Plane Stupid spokesman Malcolm Carroll said.

"It shows the seriousness with which we treat these plans and the kind of direct action we are prepared to take," he said, threatening further disruption.

So these lunatics are using the global warming hoax as a justification to pull this stuff. Evidentally, they are not paying attention to the news:

Blog: ScieBlog: Science Temperature Monitors Report Widescale Global Cooling

A compiled list of all the sources can be seen here. The total amount of cooling ranges from 0.65C up to 0.75C -- a value large enough to wipe out nearly all the warming recorded over the past 100 years. All in one year's time. For all four sources, it's the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down.

So, there is some evidence that the earth is cooling, not warming.

But putting that aside, these anarchists in London are lucky they did not get a 9mm through the chest when they breached security. I hope security all over London takes notice of these antics and steps up their game, you just cannot have this. Go march on the street, howl in the public parks, write letters to the editor, but stay out of secure areas.

Looks like global warming is becoming the one-size-fits-all justification of the looney left to do their daffy deeds.

Borrowing from Warren Zevon:

I saw a moonbat on the roof of parliament.

Moonbats of London again.

Aahhoooo!

Moonbats of London...

UPDATE: Speaking of the global warming hoax, a great post from Monkey Tennis Centre.

IRS Investigates Obama Church

The left will be having conniptions over this. But who knows, maybe the Clintons still have some operatives at the IRS. Lord knows they used them enough while they were in the White House.

The IRS is investigating the United Church of Christ over a speech Barack Obama gave to its national meeting last year after he became a candidate for president.

Obama is a member of the church.

You mean The Messiah is just a mere member?

A spokesman for the denomination says it received notice of the inquiry on Monday.

The IRS says there is reason to believe the speech violated restrictions on political activity for nonprofit groups. The denomination denies any wrongdoing.

More here and here.

An earlier reference to this incident and background here.

The complaint alleges the UCC "violated every single point outlined in the IRS guidelines," in sponsoring the Illinois Senator's appearance at the church's bi-annual national gathering, which this year was held in the Hartford Civic Center in the Connecticut capital. It charges:

* "The United Church of Christ selectively provided the convention facilities for Sen. Obama to speak in support of his campaign."

* "The United Church of Christ and Sen. Obama referenced his candidacy before and during the speech."

* "Clear and deliberate campaign activity occurred in connection with the [sic] Sen. Obama's attendance and speech."

Specifically the complaint references guidelines that an individual addressing the church does so "only in a non-candidate capacity," that the individual makes no "mention of his or her candidacy or the election," and that "no campaign activity occurs in connection with the candidate's attendance." The complaint also cites a guideline that prohibits a church from mentioning an individual's political candidacy or the upcoming election in "the communications announcing the candidate's attendance at the event." Both a video and a transcript of Obama's speech are available on the UCC website and apparently will be present throughout the election.

The complaint is replete with citations and links directly to both the IRS guidelines themselves as well as the transcript of Obama's speech as presented on the UCC website. Also linked are communications from the UCC in the run-up to the event that focus on Obama's role not as a Senator but in his capacity as a presidential candidate.

Prediction: Zero will come of this.

Update: Hmm. And this. Does the IRS knows they have employees who worship at the Church of Obama?

Maybe it was the representation of youth in the crowd that lends the oft-cited air of a rock concert that has been attributed to Obama rallies.

But that wasn't quite it, not entirely. It was more like church – not the stuffy kind, but roof-shaking soul church where people testify and dance in the aisles when the spirit's upon them.

"It's electric! Can't you feel it?" said one man, who told me he was headed for work at the IRS after the rally. I could feel it, because it's a fundamental element of crowd psychology that the expectation of "electricity" creates it.

We may soon need mass de-programming.

Hot Air links. Thanks!

Update II: Interesting LA Times poll: McCain would beat Obama and Clinton, poll says. Quite at odds with the fraudulent CBS/NYT poll.

Has the Clinton Camp Seen This Photo?

Sweetness & Light, where all this fun began the other day, has unearthed this AP photo from here, and Steve Gilbert wonders:

And again, nobody here is saying this makes Mr. Obama a Muslim.

It is just a curious thing that we should not have seen such photos before, if they are in the possession of the Associated Press.

Update: Lawhawk tracked down more on the photo.

This photo shows him wearing different African tribal garb, and I have the same thoughts about this as I did the first photo. Big deal.

Name one of Obama's achievements.

UN to Israel: You're Responsible for Pali Terror

They're no longer even trying to sugarcoat it. The United Nations is now accusing Israel of apartheid and blaming them for people trying to murder them on a daily basis.

Sadly, I'm not surprised by any of this, considering the history of the independent investigator, laughably called an expert in the headline.

A report commissioned by the United Nations suggests that Palestinian terrorism is the "inevitable consequence" of Israeli occupation and laws that resemble South African apartheid — a claim Israel rejected Tuesday as enflaming hatred between Jews and Palestinians.

The report by John Dugard, independent investigator on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for the U.N. Human Rights Council, will be presented next month, but it has been posted on the body's Web site.

In it, Dugard, a South African lawyer who campaigned against apartheid in the 1980s, says "common sense ... dictates that a distinction must be drawn between acts of mindless terror, such as acts committed by al-Qaida, and acts committed in the course of a war of national liberation against colonialism, apartheid or military occupation."

While Palestinian terrorist acts are to be deplored, "they must be understood as being a painful but inevitable consequence of colonialism, apartheid or occupation," writes Dugard, whose 25-page report accuses the Jewish state of acts and policies consistent with all three.

He cited checkpoints and roadblocks restricting Palestinian movement to house demolitions and what he terms the "Judaization" of Jerusalem.

As long as there is occupation, there will be terrorism, he argues.

"Acts of terror against military occupation must be seen in historical context," Dugard says. "This is why every effort should be made to bring the occupation to a speedy end. Until this is done, peace cannot be expected, and violence will continue."

Israel's U.N. ambassador in Geneva slammed Dugard's analysis.

"The common link between al-Qaida and the Palestinian terrorists is that both intentionally target civilians with the mere purpose to kill," Itzhak Levanon said. "The fact that Professor Dugard is ignoring this essential fact, demonstrates his inability to use objectivity in his assessment.

Dugard was appointed in 2001 as an unpaid expert by the now-defunct U.N. Human Rights Commission to investigate only violations by the Israeli side, prompting Israel and the U.S. to dismiss his reports as one-sided. Israel refused to allow him to conduct a U.N.-mandated fact-finding mission on its Gaza offensive in 2006.

Needless to say, Dugard is far from independent.

Check out Five Facts About John Dugard and UN "expert" John Dugard: Terrorist Spokesperson with a UN License.

Clemens a Real Boob

The legal woes continue to mount for Roger Clemens.

The New York Times reported on Monday that the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform has drafted a letter recommending that the Justice Department launch a criminal investigation into whether Clemens committed perjury during his testimony on Feb. 13.

Citing three lawyers familiar with the matter, the newspaper said that Clemens' accuser, Brian McNamee, was not included in the letter, prompting speculation that the committee has concluded that the trainer's testimony was truthful.

I know that since this report is coming form the New York Times it is very suspect, but if the Old Grey Hag managed to accidentally report this accurately, Mr. Clemens may have a very rocky 2008 ahead of him. It's not a good thing to have congress send the Department of Justice after you. As Martha Stewart found out in her insider trading case, judges don't like you lying about your activities to investigators.

Does anybody really think the Mrs. Clemens was taking HGH but not the Rocket? From the same trainer?

Maybe the prison team has an opening for a starting right hander.

Speaking of Mrs. Clemens, that party at Jose Canseco's house that her husband denied being at? Well, it appears Debbie Clemens and Canseco's then-wife Jessica were comparing boob jobs at said party.

Congress is believed to have received new evidence over the past 10 days that may further undermine Roger Clemens' sworn testimony that he did not attend a suddenly notorious 1998 party at Jose Canseco's South Florida home.

The Daily News has learned that in the days since the Feb. 13 public hearing on steroids in baseball, another major leaguer has informed congressional investigators that Clemens often joked in the clubhouse about a memorable account of the party - a scene in which Debbie Clemens and Canseco's ex-wife Jessica compared the results of their surgical breast enhancements.

The new revelation adds to the probability that Congress will make a criminal referral of the matter to the Justice Department, which lawyers on both sides have told the News was always a likelihood.

Care to retract that story, Rog?

Clueless Beeb Laments Record Fees

This is almost too easy. In this item about investment banks making a lot of fee revenue last year, the BBC editors continue to document their own lack of knowledge about basic finance/economics.

They showcase their stupidity in the very first line.

Fees earned by investment banks worldwide hit a record in 2007 for the fifth year running, despite the losses caused by the credit crisis.

Actually, fees generated by originating a credit has no connection to whether or not the loan is subsequently performing or non-performing. Just as the commission a car salesman earns on a sale is not contingent on whether the car turns out later to be a good car or a bad car.

Then they top themselves in the last paragraph.

The credit squeeze has also made it harder for companies to borrow, which could lead to a decline in corporate takeovers and the fees they generate for investment banks.

Actually, with the easing of interest rates and expansion of the money supply by the Federal Reserve and a dropping of interest rates by the Bank of England, it has recently become easier for companies to borrow, not harder. Whether or not companies take advantage of the lower rates is another question, dependent mainly on profitability.

I suggest that the BBC editors stop reading Karl Marx and start reading Adam Smith and Milton Friedman.

1993 WTC Bomber Whines He Can't Get Supreme Court Hearing

Aw, the poor thing can't get himself a date with the Supremes. Heartbreaking, isn't it?

On the upside, he's rotting away at Supermax.

A shame he hasn't been executed.

Fifteen years after the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, a Palestinian sentenced to more than 100 years in prison in the attack claims that a vengeful U.S. government has blocked him from appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Ahmad Mohammed Ajaj, who remains in extreme isolation in the nation's most secure prison, filed a lawsuit last year in U.S. District Court in Manhattan against more than a dozen judges, federal court employees, Bureau of Prisons officials and his former defense lawyer Maranda Fritz.

He said they failed to notify him of appeals court rulings and blocked his access to what he would need for a Supreme Court appeal of his conviction on conspiracy charges in the Feb. 26, 1993, bombing, which killed six people and injured more than 1,000 others.

In court documents filed last week, government lawyers said Ajaj has no right to bring the claims against court personnel.

Fritz, the defense lawyer, said in an interview that she worked on the case for seven years, collected evidence from around the globe and has not worked on the case in five or six years.

"I was terribly disappointed when the Supreme Court would not accept the case," she said. "I believe the results were wrong. I argued it in every way that I knew how. I think the issues were substantial and novel enough."

In his lawsuit, Ajaj claimed the U.S. judicial system denied him access to the courts in retaliation against him and Arab and Muslim prisoners for the "9-11-2001 tragedy" and for his complaints about the government's conduct.

Looks like the lawyer Fritz has a thing for Barack Obama. Maybe she can plead her case to The Messiah after he's sworn in.

Of course it will largely be ignored, but today is the 15th anniversary of the attack.

It's a shame Bill Clinton didn't take terrorism so seriously at the time. In fact, he never even visited the site afterward.

Update: Lawhawk and Michelle Malkin look back 15 years.

'Osama bin London' Found Guilty

When you give yourself a nickname like this, you get what you have coming.

Of course, running terrorist training camps and encouraging murder don't help, either.

A Muslim fanatic who boasted of being "Osama bin London" has been found guilty of organising terrorist training camps.

Mohammed Hamid, 50, was also convicted of encouraging others to murder non-believers at the end of a four-month trial at Woolwich Crown Court.

Three of his followers, Kibley da Costa, 25, Mohammed Al-Figari, 45, and Kader Ahmed, 20, were found guilty of attending terror camps in the New Forest and at a Berkshire paintballing centre.

Two further members of the gang, Mohammed Kyriacou, 19, and Yassin Mutegombwa, 23, admitted attending terrorist training camps, it can be reported today after restrictions were lifted.

Property manager Mousa Brown, 41, was cleared of providing and receiving weapons training and has been freed from custody.

The court heard Hamid led an al Qaida-style terrorist cell and aspired to send his recruits to join camps in Afghanistan and East Africa.

Among his pupils were five of the July 21 failed bombers, including ringleader Muktar Said Ibrahim, who attended Lake District camps in 2004.

Detectives said although there is no evidence Hamid organised the attacks, he was partly responsible for the state of mind of those that did.

He boasted that the July 7 attacks were "not even breakfast for me" and hours afterwards sent a text message to his friend, July 21 conspirator Hussain Osman.

It read: "We fear no-one except Allah. We will not change our ways, we are proud to be Muslim and we will not hide."

Hamid organised outdoor activities including camping and paintballing at sites in the Lake District, New Forest, Berkshire, Kent and East Sussex.

The jury found three of these trips were terrorist training designed to recruit, groom and corrupt impressionable young Muslims.

They were combined with incendiary weekly talks at his east London council home where he sowed the seeds of hate among his followers.

He was joined in his teachings by Atilla Ahmet, 43, the self-styled emir of the gang, who admitted three charges of soliciting murder at the start of the trial.

More from the BBC.

Here's a look at some of his cohorts. Looks like a braod strata.

Clockwise from top-left: Atilla Ahmet, 43: Guilty of soliciting to murder
Kibley Da Costa, 24: Guilty of attending terrorism training, providing training, holding terrorist articles
Kader Ahmed, 20: guilty of attending two training camps. Cleared on third charge
Mohammed Al-Figari, 42: Guilty of attending camps and holding terrorist articles

Terror-Trained 'Activists' Now In Gaza

It appears the breach from Gaza into Egypt earlier this month served some purposes beyond the Palestinians loading up on smokes and high-def televisions.

It also allowed some Al Qaeda and some more nefarious activists to infiltrate back into Gaza.

Yes, even YNet is now calling them activists.

I guess considering they're actively trying to murder Israelis, perhaps it's being used properly, huh?

Trained terror activists and al-Qaeda operatives have recently entered the Gaza Strip through the breached border with Egypt, head of the IDF's Intelligence Branch Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin said Tuesday.

In a briefing to the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Yadlin stated that "the breaching of the border along the Philadelphi route has enabled Hamas to bring back to Gaza activists that were sent to undergo training in Syria and Iran, including snipers, explosives experts and engineers."

According to Yadlin, al-Qaeda operatives have also managed to infiltrate Gaza before Egypt resealed the border.

Winter Soldiers Part Deux

For those unfamiliar with the term Winter Soldiers, it was originally coined to describe service members, and as later revealed but ignored, non-soldiers who delivered a series of testimonies to a "panel" fronted by folks like John Kerry, to bring discredit to the service members fighting in the Vietnam conflict.

This charming piece of propaganda even had enough influence to get into the Congressional Record mainly on the efforts of Kerry, who then rode this bit of traitorous activity all to the way to his own seat in the Senate and then a presidential bid.

Well, there is an equally vile group today named the Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW) who are going to stage their own version of these hearings for the current generation of service members and undoubtedly are hoping for the same outcome. There is no doubt they will present story after gut-wrenching story of the horrors of war designed to do one thing--tug at the heart strings of all who hear them while portraying our service members in the worst possible light.

Obiter Dictum has quite a bit on this issue.

The IVAW also follows one of the other rules that may be applied to all liberal causes. The surest clue that a website or blog is run by a liberal is that it will have the dot.org tag rather then the more common dot.com ending. The other hard and fast rule is that any story involving a Dem in a scandal will omit the party affiliation until the middle or the end of the story.

So if the party affiliation is not in the first paragraph. the rule of thumb is that it is about a Democrat.

Back to the IVAW. Their latest attempt at the Winter Soldiers hearings is going to be March 13-16 in Washington, DC, and no doubt just like in a previous generation, they are going to try and get their 15 minutes of infamy in front of Congress and, who knows, the next senator from Massachusetts could be presenting their case to a sympathetic congress.

A lot of the antiwar groups who have veterans among their ranks are starting to make noise again. Another one of these groups is Vote Vets. I implore everybody to keep your eyes and ears on these groups and do not let them hide behind the shield of being a veteran, which they view as a victim shield, from getting any traction or credibility.

They do not have the best interests of service members or veterans in mind. They are political action groups pure and simple who have aligned themselves with the most far left groups in this country. One other piece of interesting information. The IVAW, Vets for Peace and Vote Vets get funding from something called the Inavale Foundation. Do a search engine search for the foundation. Let me know your results.

Obiter also has a letter for the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee along with the contact information for the senators who sit on this committee.

Instead of paying attention to these bitter publicity-seeking malcontents, might I suggest that your time be better spent attending a meeting of the Vets For Freedom Heroes Tour.

Digital Repression: Behold the Bluetooth Burqa

For the modern Muslim woman, you can now mix stone-age repression with 21st Century technology.

Can a burqa be sexy? A Berlin-based artist has invented a digitally-enabled robe that will send an image of a woman's face -- or anything else -- via Bluetooth.

A burqa may not be the flirtiest garment ever invented for women. The highly modest head-to-toe robe even shrouds the eyes, so for centuries it's been difficult for women wearing them to send suggestive signals to men.

But now a German designer has debuted a digitally-enabled burqa that can broadcast a photo of the wearer to nearby mobile phones. Markus Kison calls it the "CharmingBurka," and says it isn't forbidden by Islamic law.

A model demonstrated a prototype of Kison's garment at the Seamless 2008 design and fashion show in Boston, a high-tech fashion event run with support from the Masschusetts Institute of Technology.

Kison says the burqa has a "digital layer" that incorporates a Bluetooth antenna, which lets women "decide for themselves where they want to position themselves virtually." Nearby mobile phones that also use Bluetooth will light up with any small file a woman chooses to broadcast as her identity -- a photo, a cartoon, a text file or even a sound clip.

Maybe even a plea for help, as in "help, rescue me from this death cult!"

Alas, there's that pesky mass psychosis known as sharia that may provide some obstacles, especially to those still stuck in the 7th Century.

A broadcasting burqa may not be explicitly forbidden by Islamic law -- since most interpreters of Shariah have never imagined such a thing -- but certain Islamic governments have tried to clamp down on electronic flirting. By 2002 it was so common for teenagers in Saudi Arabia to send each other pictures of themselves by phone that an import ban was imposed on camera phones. But demand was so high that the law was lifted two years later.

Yes, now flirting is so out of control in the Magic Kingdom, they're rounding up the offenders.

Thank You, Shadowy Overlords

Diebold Accidentally Leaks Results Of 2008 Election Early

Via Hot Air.

Grim Quagmire

Looks like the New York Times ("we print all the news that fits our agenda") is headed to a proxy fight in the board room.

Harbinger Capital Partners and Firebrand Partners will announce that they have purchased more New York Times Co. shares as they prepare for a proxy battle with the venerable newspaper publisher, according to a published report.

The investment group is expected to report a bigger stake in the company in a regulatory filing later Monday, The Wall Street Journal reported.

So what does this mean? A bit of a battle over direction and control of the paper, that's what.

The two companies said last month that they want to name a slate of four directors to New York Times Co.'s board, setting up a possible proxy struggle when the company holds its annual meeting in April.

As of Feb. 19, Harbinger owned a nearly 16% stake in New York Times Co.'s Class A shares.

The funds' efforts may be moot. The Class A stock is the publicly traded issue, entitling shareholders to vote for four board directors. The company's super-voting Class B stock is held primarily by the Ochs-Sulzberger family, which is entitled to vote for the remaining nine directors.

The Sulzberger family should be able to hold control, but the fight will likely damage the stock price. At least one significant analyst has switched to a "sell" rating on the Old Grey Hag.

Meanwhile, Deutsche Bank analyst Paul Ginocchio downgraded his rating on New York Times Co. to sell from hold, saying that the recent advance in the media company's stock -- up 50% since late January, coinciding with the Harbinger-Firebrand announcement -- "discounts any operational benefits" that might result if the investment group succeeds in changing the company's board.

In other words, some of the smart money has decided to head for the door.

Related: A McCain Coincidence? NYT Stock Nosedived Thursday and Friday.

Democrat Unity: Clinton Supporter Stabs Obama Supporter

Agent of Change

It's safe to say we have some family feuds brewing while the winds of change sweep across the fruited plain.

The cut-throat world of presidential politics usually doesn’t go this far to get its point across.

But Jose Ortiz, 28 — a Hillary Clinton supporter — is behind bars after stabbing his Barack Obama-supporting brother-in-law, Sean Shurelds, following a political argument, according to KYW1060.com.

“One is a supporter of Barack Obama, the other is a supporter of Hillary Clinton, and an argument of words turned bloody when one brother-in-law tried to choke the other and the victim then responded with a knife and stabbed his brother-in-law in the stomach,” Montgomery County, Pa., District Attorney Risa Furman said, according to KYW.

Shurelds was taken to the hospital in critical condition, and police allegedly found the weapon in a dishwasher at the Collegeville home where the two brawled.

Ortiz faces felony assault charges and was being held on $20,000 bond.

KYW reports that if Ortiz is convicted of the felony charge, he won’t be able to vote.

Don't worry, like most good Democrats, he's probably registered under multiple names in a variety of locations.

Update: Hot Air links. Thanks!

And note buried in the original link, the perp Ortiz is said to be a Republican Clinton supporter.

Update II: Thanks also to Gateway Pundit for the link.

Update III: Drudge links the Smoking Gun. Behold:

Meet Jose Antonio Ortiz. The Pennsylvania man allegedly stabbed his brother-in-law in the stomach after the pair quarreled about their respective support of Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. According to cops, Ortiz, 28, stabbed Sean Shurelds last Thursday night in the kitchen of an Upper Providence Township home. According to a criminal complaint, a copy of which you'll find here, the 41-year-old Shurelds, an Obama supporter, told Ortiz that the Illinois senator was "trashing" Clinton (apparently in regard to recent primary and caucus results). Ortiz, a Clinton supporter, replied that "Obama was not a realist." While not exactly fighting words, the verbal political tiff led to some mutual choking and punching. And, allegedly, a stabbing in the abdomen...

Degrees of change...

Update IV: Thanks to Ace for the link.

Update V: Michelle Malkin adds Mr. Ortiz to the unhinged mugshot gallery.

Cabal of Far Left Soros-Funded Fringe Groups Take Aim at McCain

No surprise here, leading the charge for this amalgam of fringe groups is The Silky Pony himself.

Naturally, they're also running against George W. Bush as well.

Democratic grass roots organizations on Monday launched a $20 million campaign to defeat Republican John McCain in the 2008 U.S. presidential election by focusing their attention on rising costs of the Iraq war.

The campaign, supported by former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, aims to link war spending with the ailing U.S. economy.

"There's a great concern and anxiety, angst out there among most Americans about their economic security," Edwards said in a teleconference from North Carolina. "All these things are made much worse by concern about what's happening in Iraq ... People don't understand why we're spending $500 billion and counting in Iraq."

Edwards added, "The American people are going to have a very clear choice this fall -- a Democrat who will bring this thing to an end ... and Senator John McCain who will continue the war."

Here's the list of kook outfits on board:

Center for American Progress, USAction, MoveOn.org, VoteVets.org, Service Employees International Union and Americans United for Change.

Naturally, they're portrayed as "grass roots" organizations, but let's take a look at some of them.

The Center for American Progress, another Podesta-Soros-Ickes creation that spawned the odious hit squad from Media Matters.

USAction, another dubious Soros frontgroup.

A member organization of the Win Without War anti-war coalition, USAction receives financial
support from Working Assets and the Open Society Institute.

MoveOn.org: Enough said. They lost all credibility with the "General Betray Us" smear.

VoteVets was behind the Rush Limbaugh phony soldier smear campaign last fall.

Americans United for Change is run by a former Jon Corzine operative named Brad Woodhouse.

So there isn't anything newsworthy here. A bunch of far left political hacks who practice the art of political smear, yet they're give a free pass by Reuters, which pretends these are "grass roots" groups.

It's going to be a long campaign, folks.

Update: Didn't see it earlier, but I notice Michelle Malkin had a similar reaction.

Muslim Defenders' Team: Bali Bombings 'Not Acts of Terrorism'

Yes, believe it or not, a terror bombing that left 202 people dead is now considered just a random crime, according to some Orwellian outfit known as the Muslim Defenders' Team, which sounds like some sort of psychotic group of superheroes.

THE 2002 Bali bombings were not terrorist acts but "ordinary crimes" and the three men awaiting execution for the atrocity should have their convictions quashed "and their good names rehabilitated", lawyers argued yesterday.

However, Fahmi Bachmid, from the Muslim Defenders' Team, conceded that his clients could still then be convicted under an amended brief and, presumably, executed.

Appearing in Denpasar District Court for Amrozi bin Nurhasyim, Ali Ghufron (alias Mukhlas) and Imam Samudra, Mr Bachmid presented an extraordinary second appeal against the men's death sentences.

A previous appeal, in December 2006, was thrown out by Indonesia's Supreme Court.

The chief judge in one of three panels sitting yesterday, Ida Bagus Putu Madeg, allowed the matter to proceed and conceded afterwards there was technically no limit to the number of appeals that could be lodged.

The defence will rely on a 2004 decision in Indonesia's Constitutional Court that only "extraordinary crimes" -- which include terrorism -- can be tried under retrospectively enacted legislation.

The anti-terrorism law under which the men were convicted was passed after the October 2002 attacks that left 202 people, including 88 Australians, dead.

Prosecutors want the trio to be tried under the crimes act, with any conviction still carrying the death sentence. Judges baulked yesterday at a request to send the matter to Java, where the three men are being held, saying they would hand down a decision on that matter on Thursday.

Prosecutors in the stifling courtroom were outraged at proceedings, describing terrorism as "something that is extremely cruel".

Not according to certain practitioners of the Religion of Peace.

Plumbing the Depths of Depravity: Wheelchair Bombers

Earlier this month, the Al Qaeda monsters were exposed using mentally incapacitated women as homicide bombers in Iraq.

Now they've moved on to using handicapped men in wheelchairs.

I wonder if this will again be described as brilliant?

Disabled bomber kills senior Iraq policeman

A handicapped man in a wheel chair wearing an explosives vest blew himself up inside a police building in the central Iraqi town of Samarra on Monday, killing a senior officer, security officials told AFP.

Two other officers were also killed in the attack.

Iraqi security officials said the bomber came to the building to meet Brigadier General Abdul Jabbar Saleh Rabia, the deputy commander for the security of Samarra.

A security official said he was allowed to enter the building without being searched as he was handicapped.

By now you think they would realize everyone should be searched.

H/T Writer Mom via LGF.

Iranian Transsexual Revolution

According to the swarthy munchkin, there aren't any homosexuals in Iran. Probably because they've been hanging them.

Apparently, however, there are plenty of transsexuals.

Homosexual relationships are banned in Iran, but the country allows sex change operations and hundreds of men have elected for surgery to change their lives.

"He wants to kill me. He keeps telling me to come home so he can kill me. He had put rat poison in my tea."

For Ali Askar, at age 24, the decision to become a woman came at a heavy cost. His father threatened to kill him if he went ahead with surgery.

Now renamed Negar, she says she would not have had the operation if she did not live in Iran.

"If I didn't have to operate, I wouldn't do it. I wouldn't touch God's work."

But as Ali, he felt he had no identity.

He could not work with men because they sexually harassed him and made fun of him. But he could not work with women because he was not officially a woman.

"I am Iranian. I want to live here and this society tells you: you have to be either a man or a woman".

OK, so there's no homosexuality in Iran, yet while he was still Ali, he was sexually harassed by other men?

Hmmm.

Methinks Little Mahmoud is living in denial, no?

Sex changes have been legal in Iran since Ayatollah Khomeini, the spiritual leader of the 1979 Islamic revolution, passed a fatwa - a religious edict - authorising them for "diagnosed transsexuals" 25 years ago.

Today, Iran carries out more sex change operations than any other nation in the world except for Thailand.

The government even provides up to half the cost for those needing financial assistance and a sex change is recognised on your birth certificate.

I can see Democrats latching on to idea of footing the tab for sex changes, if they haven't already.

"Islam has a cure for people suffering from this problem. If they want to change their gender, the path is open," says Hojatol Islam Muhammad Mehdi Kariminia, the religious cleric responsible for gender reassignment.

He says an operation is no more a sin than "changing wheat to flour to bread".

Yet homosexuality is still punishable by death.

"The discussion is fundamentally separate from a discussion regarding homosexuals. Absolutely not related. Homosexuals are doing something unnatural and against religion," says Kariminia. "It is clearly stated in our Islamic law that such behaviour is not allowed because it disrupts the social order."

Such a tolerant people.