In yet another instance of fundamentalism and youth clashing, a Saudi man was found guilty of insulting the Prophet, flew to Malaysia where he was rearrested and is being flown back, despite his apology and his mother’s entreaties.
Can not people excuse a youth who seems to have done this in a moment of the aggressiveness of Youth?
Hugh Tomlinson Dubai Published at 12:01AM, February 11 The Times UK
Story:
Malaysia on Sunday deported the young Saudi journalist who is wanted in his home country over a Twitter post about the Prophet Mohammed (PBUH) that sparked calls for his execution, an official said.
Hamza Kashgari, who was detained in Malaysia during the week after fleeing Saudi Arabia, left the country in the custody of Saudi officials, according to a Malaysian government official who spoke to AFP on condition of anonymity.
Malaysia’s government would not immediately confirm Hamza’s deportation, but a Home Ministry statement Sunday said Kashgari would be sent back to Saudi Arabia.
“Malaysia has a long-standing arrangement by which individuals wanted by one country are extradited when detained by the other, and (Kashgari) will be repatriated under this arrangement,” the statement said.
“The nature of the charges against the individual in this case are a matter for the Saudi Arabian authorities.”
Mother appeals for mercy
The mother of a 23-year-old Saudi columnist accused of insulting Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) has made an impassionate appeal for authorities in the conservative Muslim Gulf Kingdom to pardon her son.
The appeal by Umm Hamza followed reports of her son’s arrest in Malaysia just after he fled the country and coincided with calls by Saudi Islamic fundamentalists to punish Hamza Kashgari in accordance with Islamic law, which involves death penalty for apostasy, newspapers in the Kingdom said.
People may know that Count Dracula was a real person who lived in Transylvania and he is reported to have impaled his enemies heads in rows(1000 heads on both the sides of the road)
Horror: Christopher Lee in the 1958 horror film Dracula which was inspired by Bram Stoker’s novel
The Church and the Graveyard associated with Dracula by Bram Stoker was hit by land slide and bones came tumbling down the slope!
Grave danger: Human bones have crumbled off the side of the cliff where St Mary’s Church, in Whitby, stands
Goths who flocked to the graveyard because of its links to Dracula were banned from the churchyard in 2011
Story:
A historic church and graveyard which features in Bram Stoker’s Gothic novel Dracula is faced with a horror story of its own.
Human bones uncovered after a landslide last month have been washed down the cliff St Mary‘s Church stands on in Whitby after heavy rainfall.
The human remains are then being collected at the bottom of the cliff face and re-buried.
St Mary’s Reverend Canon David Smith said: ‘The cemetery has been a closed for more than a century so if any graves are exposed it’s only bones.
‘If anything is exposed we collect and reinter them in the same churchyard away from the edge.’
There are fears the cliff the church stands on will eventually collapse in years to come.
The cemetery closed in 1865 but people still use the church.
Rev. Smith said: ‘St Mary’s is the oldest building left in Whitby. It is a grade one listed building and still the parish church so it would be a loss to the community.’
The cancellation of two final episodes of a TV Show caused an uproar in Thailand.
The programmer was focusing on Political manipulation with a fictitious prime minister.
Does any one remember ‘Kissa Kursi Ka’, which angered Indira Gandhi and Sanjay Gandhi.?
Story;
A Thai TV station’s decision to cancel a popular and edgy soap opera mini-series has caused an uproar among viewers and critics who are demanding that the show’s final episodes be shown.
Channel 3 announced Friday that it would immediately stop airing the prime-time action drama “Nua Mek 2” after “having considered that some content was inappropriate for broadcast.”
The show, which began Dec. 14 and was aired three nights a week, told the story of a fictitious Thai prime minister, his corrupt deputy, black magic and political manipulation. After the station’s announcement, the final two two-hour episodes, which were scheduled for Friday and Saturday, were not broadcast.
The station did not further explain its decision to cancel the show, but a Channel 3 executive told a member of the National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission, Thailand’s broadcast regulator, that the channel feared the show’s content would violate the law, Thai media reported over the weekend.
Some supporters of the series speculated that Thailand’s government, which closely monitors television content, had a hand in the cancellation, but government officials denied having pressured Channel 3 to terminate the show.
“Those who know best (about the issue) are the broadcaster, producers and related personnel,” Prime Minister’s Office minister Warathep Rattanakorn told reporters Saturday.
Criticism and discussion go on for four long hours before the fanclub admin of the actress wrote a message admitting that the message was written that way because of what they heard on “Krob Krua Bungtern”that a new lakorn is airing this week, that’s why they second guess that “neua Mek 2 is ending this Friday.” And alluding things to politician is also “guessing”. The message are as below:
“Hello, last evening we wrote that neua Mek 2 is ending this Friday and someone took our message out of the page to a lot of places. We would like to clarify that we heard from Pe’Benz in “Krob Krua Bungtern” that the lakorn Raeng Prathana is airing this week, so we guess Neua Mek 2 is ending this Friday. We also guess why it end so early because the lakorn deals with politcal issues. This lead a lot of people to turn this into a big issue regarding politics. The truth was this is all guessing. #admin”
There are several versions of the text of the Second Amendment, each with slight capitalization and punctuation differences, found in the official documents surrounding the adoption of the Bill of Rights.[5] One version was passed by the Congress,[6] while another is found in the copies distributed to the States[7] and then ratified by them.
As passed by the Congress:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.[8]
The original hand-written copy of the Bill of Rights, approved by the House and Senate, was prepared by scribeWilliam Lambert and resides in theNational Archives.(wiki)
1.Despite Militia a well regulated…infringed”(‘despite’ being inferred) in this case the Lobbyists are Right.
2.Add a comma at after ”the Right of the people’ to read.9this could have been omitted in the original)
‘A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed’
Then, the phrase ‘the Right of the people ‘ qualifies the previous caluse ‘ A well regulated..” means that it is only the Right of the Militia, being the Right of the people, whose(Militia’s) Rights to arms can not be infringed upon.
But then if people call the bearing of Arms is their Right, then let them bear the responsibility of being Gunned down.
Story:
“”There are nearly 12,000 murders a year from guns in this country. When are you guys going to focus on that, and stop telling me the answer is more guns. It is not the answer!” he exclaimed to his guest. “How many more kids have to die, before you guys say, ‘we want less guns, not more.’”
“Oh what a load of nonsense,” he grumbled. “I’m so frustrated, I’m so furious, that these kids, have been blown away again, with legally acquired weapons. Some boy, who’s got problems, takes his mother’s three weapons – including this ridiculous assault rifle – and goes in a school and kills these kids, and you guys on the gun lobby still want to tell me the answer is more guns. It is madness!”
These are the words of Piers Morgan on Gun Control…
n the aftermath of yet another shocking American gun incident, on Friday evening “Piers Morgan Tonight” invited in a host of experts, survivors and insightful voices, all charged with attempting to add perspective and context to a school shooting in Newtown, Conn. that cost 28 people their lives.
Hosting a live program dedicated entirely to the tragedy that left 20 young children – ranging from Kindergarten age to the fourth grade – dead within the walls of their Sandy Hook Elementary School, Piers Morgan welcomed members from both sides of the gun debate, generating a spirited discussion on the ways in which the nation should respond moving forward:
“Why on Earth would you want more guns in schools after what’s happened today,” Morgan asked Steve Dulan.’
People in The US have called for Piers Morgan’s deportation..
A petition seeking to deport CNN’s Piers Morgan for speaking out in favor of gun control has garnered enough signatures to elicit an official response from the Obama administration.
British Citizen and CNN television host Piers Morgan is engaged in a hostile attack against the U.S. Constitution by targeting the Second Amendment. We demand that Mr. Morgan be deported immediately for his effort to undermine the Bill of Rights and for exploiting his position as a national network television host to stage attacks against the rights of American citizens.
The “Piers Morgan Tonight” host has taken a particularly aggressive stance on the issue in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, making the case for stricter gun control laws in the U.S. and calling a gun advocate who appeared on his show an “unbelievably stupid man.”
As of 9:15 a.m. Pacific time Monday, the petition had garnered more than 38,000 signatures.
Not that any of this is fazing Morgan, however. He’s mostly taking the entire thing in stride, as evidenced by his Twitter feed.
Gawker:
Morgan spent most of the weekend laughing the petition off, tweeting at critics with grammar corrections and snarky one-liners. But as more conspicuous voices, such as that of British Donald Trump Alan Sugar, joined the rabble, Morgan’s demeanor grew more somber.
“I am also a legal resident with the same USA Visa as you. But I keep my mouth shut here,” Lord Sugar tweeted at Morgan. “Coward,” Morgan responded.
Later, after pointing out the irony inherent in a petition ostensibly defending the 2nd Amendment while ignoring the 1st, Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto added fuel to the petitioners’ bonfire by directing Morgan’s attention to Kleindienst v. Mandel — a Supreme Court ruling that barring a foreign journalist from entering the country does not violate the 1st Amendment.(truthdig.com)
The following is the position of the Second Amendment
A firestorm was sparked when the Constitution was proposed in 1787 without a bill of rights. Federalists and Antifederalists fiercely battled over the issue as the States began ratifying the Constitution. In the first conventions, the Federalists defeated demands for recognition of the rights to free speech, assembly, and bearing arms. But the tide turned in Virginia, where Patrick Henry and George Mason prevailed in persuading the convention to demand a bill of rights.
A great compromise was reached when the Federalists and Antifederalists concurred that the Constitution would be ratified subject to the agreement that the first Congress would consider amendments. James Madison did just that by proposing what became the Bill of Rights in 1787. Federalists explained that what became the Second Amendment would protect the right of the people to keep and bear their private arms, which would guard against tyranny and the evils of a standing army. However, proposals to increase state militia powers were rejected.
Thomas Jefferson, a life-long hunter and gun collector, wrote just before his death in 1826 that “all power is inherent in the people; . . . it is their right and duty to be at all times armed.” The understanding by his generation of the Second Amendment was clear and unmistakable—as its text states, it recognizes “the right of the people” to possess and carry arms. The Constitution defines the respective powers of the federal and state governments, but the Bill of Rights speaks largely of individual rights. If the Second Amendment is no exception, what it protects—and what restrictions government may impose—will continue to be hotly debated.”
BBC has dill -dallied and finally came down with an explanation.
Scroll down for Videos.
Story:
t has come to light this week that the most pre-eminent broadcasting company in the world has lost the original recordings of its output for the entire day on September 11th 2001, just over five years on, yet no major news agency has even bothered to report the fact.
Despite being currently the biggest story on the internet and in the alternative media, the only place in the mainstream the story has appeared is on a small German news website.
This highlights the fact that the mainstream media is not free to report events. The information it disseminates is strictly controlled and regulated.
The BBC was forced into claiming that the recordings covering the 9/11 attacks have mysteriously vanished in response to fierce criticism over the fact that on the day the news agency reported that World Trade Center Building 7 had collapsed almost 30 minutes before it actually came down…
The BBC has been forced to respond to footage showing their correspondent reporting the collapse of WTC 7 before it fell on 9/11, claiming tapes from the day are somehow missing, and refusing to identify the source for their bizarre act of “clairvoyance” in accurately pre-empting the fall of Building 7.
Here is the BBC’s response to the questions about the footage that was unearthed yesterday, with my comments after each statement.
1. We’re not part of a conspiracy. Nobody told us what to say or do on September 11th. We didn’t get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down. We didn’t receive press releases or scripts in advance of events happening.
“We didn’t get told in advance that buildings were going to fall down.” If this is true, then how on earth did the BBC report the collapse of Building 7 before it happened? Psychic clairvoyance? Of course they were told that WTC 7 was coming down, just like the firefighters, police, first responders and CNN were told it was coming down. They had to have had a source for making such a claim. The BBC is acting like the naughty little boy who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar. No one here is claiming the BBC are “part of the conspiracy,” but their hideous penchant to just repeat what authorities tell them without even a cursory investigation (and with the Building they are telling us has collapsed mockingly filling the background shot of the report), is a damning indictment of their yellow journalism when it comes to 9/11.
2. In the chaos and confusion of the day, I’m quite sure we said things which turned out to be untrue or inaccurate – but at the time were based on the best information we had. We did what we always did – sourced our reports, used qualifying words like “apparently” or “it’s reported” or “we’re hearing” and constantly tried to check and double check the information we were receiving.
For the first time British audiences will hear newly released audio recordings which offer a unique insight and moving perspective on 9/11 and the fateful minutes that changed America forever.
On the morning of the attacks, hundreds of hours of military and air traffic control conversations were captured on tape painting a chilling and tragic picture of events spiralling inexorably out of control. With events unfolding at breakneck-speed, the tapes reveal in minute-by-minute detail, the chaos and confusion wrought by the attacks.
Revelations include how Air Force fighter jets, scrambled to protect Washington, set out in the wrong direction – ending up 60 miles out across the Atlantic ocean and that permission to shoot down hijacked passenger planes only came through after the last plane crashed.
And while air traffic controllers watched the second plane crash into the World Trade Center tower, fighter jets were still 100 miles away from New York and amid all the confusion it took 39 minutes for the news of United 93’s hijack to reach the military.
With testimonies from the people who appear on the tapes, the film vividly conveys the emotion, courage and panic in the voices of air traffic controllers and military personnel whose job it was to protect America as it came under attack.
You must be logged in to post a comment.