News opinion 2008-07-08 Andanh.com

Surrender Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:07:24 -0500
So this is how it ends: not with a bang, but a whimper. The most senior judge in England has declared that Islamic legal principles in Sharia law may be used within Muslim communities in Britain to settle marital arguments and regulate finance. Lord Chief Justice Lord Phillips said, “Those entering into a contractual agreement can agree that the agreement shall be governed by a law other than English law.” In his speech at an East London mosque, Lord Phillips said Muslims in Britain could use Islamic legal principles as long as punishments - and divorce rulings - comply with English law. Sharia law does not comply with English law. It is a law unto itself. And so the English who gave us the Magna Carta in 1215, William Blackstone and the foundation of American law are slowly succumbing to the dictates of intolerant Islam and sowing seeds of their own destruction. The Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organization (IKWRO), an umbrella group of activists who work in Muslim countries to liberate women from the dark side of this oppressive force, according to Womensphere.wordpress.com, identifies Sharia family law as the fundamental basis for discrimination against women in the Muslim world, including communities in the United Kingdom. Here are just some of the “benefits” British Muslim women can look forward to if Sharia law replaces English law: The Muslim woman cannot marry without parental approval, worsening the problem of forced marriage; marriages can be conducted without the presence of a bride, as long as the guardian consents, creating a climate for underage and early marriage; Muslim women may only marry Muslim men. It gets worse. A Muslim man can divorce his wife by repudiating her; they have no obligation to support a former wife, or her children after the divorce; women are prohibited from divorcing husbands without his consent; abuse is not grounds for a woman to end a marriage; in matters of inheritance, sons are entitled to twice as much of an estate as daughters. Divorced women must remain single. If they remarry they can lose custody of their children. There is no similar requirement for a man. Child custody often reverts to the father at a preset age, even if the father has been abusive. It is impossible to reconcile this antiquated “law” with English law, so what could Lord Phillips mean when he says that Sharia law can be used in Muslim communities as long as such laws comply with English law? This will mean English law must become subordinate to Sharia law. This is Dhimmitude, an Islamic system of religious apartheid begun in the 7th century that forces all other religions and cultures to accept an inferior status once Muslims become the majority. Maryland’s Court of Appeals recently denied a Sharia divorce to a Pakistani man. The man’s wife of 20 years had filed for divorce. To circumvent having to share their $2 million estate and other marital assets, he went to the Pakistani embassy and applied for an Islamic divorce. The man wanted to invoke what is known as talaq, in which the husband says, “I divorce you” three times and it’s done. The Maryland court said, “If we were to affirm the use of talaq, controlled as it is by the husband, a wife, a resident of this state, would never be able to consummate a divorce action filed by her in which she seeks a division of marital property” and the talaq “directly deprives the wife of the due process she is entitled to when she initiates divorce litigation. The lack and deprivation of due process is itself contrary to (Maryland’s) public policy.” British Muslims who wish to live under Sharia law might have stayed in the countries from which they came - or return to them. But their objective appears to be domination of England, not assimilation. This also seems to be the goal for Muslims in other countries with large and growing Muslim populations. There is no due process under Sharia law. Lord Phillips has signed the death warrant for his nation if his opinion becomes the law of England. It’s one thing to fight a war and lose it. It’s quite another to willingly surrender without a struggle.

Obama breaks promises by moving to the middle Tue, 8 Jul 2008 11:07:24 -0500
A signature moment of Barack Obama’s primary campaign came last November in Des Moines, Iowa. He gave a speech at the Jefferson-Jackson Dinner that electrified the crowd and gave his campaign a kick that helped win the Iowa caucuses - a victory without which he wouldn’t be the Democratic nominee. Obama declared that “the same old Washington textbook campaigns just won’t do.” Deploring “triangulating and poll-driven positions,” he said that “telling the American people what we think they want to hear instead of telling the American people what they need to hear just won’t do.” The Democratic Party had been at its best, he told the crowd, when “we led, not by polls, but by principles; not by calculation, but by conviction.” “I run for the presidency of the United States of America because that’s the party America needs us to be right now,” he vowed, staking his candidacy on the achingly idealistic premises of a new, more forthright and uncalculating politics. What makes Obama’s “textbook” dash to the center so extraordinary is not just its speed, but how it falsifies the very essence of his candidacy. It’s as if Bill Clinton won the Democratic nomination in 1992 and announced suddenly that actually he was not a “new kind of Democrat;” or if George W. Bush, after winning his party’s nomination in 2000, forswore “compassionate conservatism;” or if John McCain, after winning the GOP nomination this year, declared in favor of a hard deadline for withdrawal from Iraq. In the past few weeks, Obama has broken two pledges (to take public financing in the general election and to filibuster legal immunity for telecoms that cooperated with the government in terrorist surveillance); has belittled his own rhetoric during the primary campaign (saying it could get “overheated and amplified” on the issue of trade); redefined his promise to meet without preconditions with the leaders of hostile states until it’s basically meaningless; endorsed a Supreme Court decision striking down a Washington, D.C., gun ban his campaign had previously said he supported; and made muddy, centrist-sounding statements about his positions on Iraq and abortion that he had to go back and try to clarify. Has there ever in recent political memory been so much calculation and bad faith by a politician who has made so much of eschewing both? We now know that Barack Obama is not naive, but his ardent supporters are. Obama exhorted them to “believe” - one of his favorite words - in him and his virtue above all, and as soon as they gave him the nomination he wanted, he showed how foolishly credulous they had been. When it comes to triangulating, he’s Hillary Clinton without the baggage. Forget the debate about whether Obama is “American enough.” He’s that great American archetype, the audacious salesman with an eye on the main chance. Nothing in his utterly orthodox left-wing record ever suggested he was a transformationally unifying figure, but he sold himself as that to the audience he needed in the Democratic primaries. Nothing in his record suggests he’s a sensible centrist, but he’s going to sell himself as one to the audience he needs in the general election, whatever contortions it takes. In his current TV ad, he touts his support for welfare reform when he actually opposed it. Obama is calculating shrewdly now - just as shrewdly as back when he was attacking calculation. His left-wing base won’t abandon him, and all the dewy-eyed new voters attracted by him will stay that way, so long as he continues to look and sound good. His task is to win over general-election voters in a center-right country who value hardheadedness and practicality in their presidents. Barack Obama doesn’t need to be a messiah figure. He needn’t even be particularly admirable. In a poisonous year for Republicans, he just needs to be a minimally acceptable Democrat, and so minimally acceptable he aims to be. But we’re a long way from Des Moines.

A cry for justice … Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:13:00 EST
Louis Coleman was a good and gentle man who saw injustice and tried to stop it, who saw hurt and tried to help. We did not agree with him every time he lifted the bullhorn. There were, in fact, times when we thought he was wrong on issues. Sometimes we thought his tactics were ineffective, even improper. But he was always there.

… The voice of racism Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:13:00 EST
Former North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms died over the Fourth of July holiday. He once said that it's for others to judge his legacy, but this much is clear: He was on the wrong side of history.

True grit, great abs Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:14:00 EST
The last week has been a great time to be a couch potato. Nothing beats sitting back in the cool of air conditioning and watching great athletes compete with all their might.

'Most crucial time' Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:14:00 EST
This is the most crucial time in my memory. Gasoline is outrageous, good jobs are hard to find, and the United States is at war.

Mayor explains Jeffersontown fuel management Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:14:00 EST
In response to your recent article regarding fueling of City of Jeffersontown vehicles, I understand that the hours spent on this reporting process must be reduced to a limited number of columns in the newspaper, but pertinent information was omitted. Several issues need to be clarified so that Jeffersontown's citizens can better understand the situation.

'Classic' Shakespeare Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:06:00 EST
In the early 1960s, I was privileged to watch Paul Scofield, a powerful dramatic actor, in his portrayal of "King Lear" in a Lincoln Center production of that classic Shakespeare play. It was amazing!

Readers' opinions on Bush's legacy Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:15:00 EST
When I see articles and cartoons daily deriding George W. Bush, I am looking at these names: Garrison Keillor, Jim Shea, Marc Murphy, The Courier-Journal -- a genuine list of nobodies.

Patriots with brown skin Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:15:00 EST
Anyone who took U.S. history in high school ought to know that one of the five men killed in the Boston Massacre, the atrocity that helped ignite the American Revolution, was a runaway slave named Crispus Attucks. The question the history books rarely consider is: Why?

The scarlet thread Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:16:00 EST
Sometimes Beck would linger in his vehicle in front of an American home, like that of the parents of Lance Cpl. Kyle Burns in Laramie, Wyo. Beck knew that, as Jim Sheeler writes, every second he waited "was one more tick of his wristwatch that, for the family inside the house, everything remained the same."

An alternative to Abramson? Mon, 07 Jul 2008 22:16:00 EST
Democrats drone about change in Washington, but recent budget hearings revealed multiple reasons for changing Louisville Metro's mayor. Yet Republicans may not offer any alternative to the long-entrenched local status quo.

Readers' views Tue, 08 Jul 2008 09:56 EDT

Tear down those outdated campaign signs

We're still nearly 5 months away from the presidential election and supporters of one presumed presidential candidate are putting up yard signs in my neighborhood.

These signs are in direct violation of a city ordinance which prohibits display of political signs prior to 30 days preceding the election for which the candidate is on the ballot.

I have spoken with Lexington code enforcement and they won't remove these signs except in certain very specific circumstances.

City addicted to the mediocre, failure Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:14 EDT

By Rob Snyder

Preserve Lexington has been clear that it is not against CentrePointe, asking only that the development include renovation of some existing buildings.

This request is modest, given that Preserve Lexington has no objection to the height, nor to the concept of redeveloping the entire block.

The developers have been disinterested in these requests. Instead of compromise, the Webb Companies have held to their position that clear-cutting and sanitizing the entire block is the only way forward toward progress.

Burgoo: Something to stew over Tue, 08 Jul 2008 07:54 EDT

Reports that Rush Limbaugh has signed a 10-year $400-million deal to continue sharing his .talent on loan from God. with legions of self-proclaimed .dittoheads. might seem jarring, given the recession and ongoing tumult in media markets. But whatever you make of Limbaugh's bombastic on-air version of the truth, his numbers don't lie. A daily audience in the 14 to 20-million range (Limbaugh ballyhoos the latter count) translates to mega-success in the bottom-line ad game that usurps a third of each airtime hour. (Maybe more than a third, if you count the premium-priced pitches woven into his trademark tirades.) In Ditto World, .El Rushbo. is living the American Dream: a college dropout overcoming drug dependence and career-threatening deafness to live larger-than-large...and get tax cuts to boot!

Four hundred million dollars works out to somewhere around eight hundred grand a week. Apparently that buys a lot of scornful harrumphing about .liberal media elites..

Back to basics for racing panel Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:14 EDT

New governors reorganize things. They merge cabinets. They split cabinets in two, or three, or more departments. They elevate departments to cabinet level or reduce cabinets to department level.

And a Kentucky Racing Commission that became the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority by the executive order of former Gov. Ernie Fletcher can become the Kentucky Horse Racing Commission by the executive order of Gov. Steve Beshear.

But a regulatory agency by any other name would still be a regulatory agency. What's important is not what we call this panel but rather how well it does its job of overseeing racing in a state that prides itself on being the horse capital of the world.

Frankly, its history in that regard . whether as the Kentucky Racing Commission or the Kentucky Horse Racing Authority . has been spotty at best.

Taking control Tue, 08 Jul 2008 02:14 EDT

The Urban County Council took a big step Thursday night toward assuming reasonable control over downtown's future.

The challenge now is to take the time to fully evaluate what, if any, project is deserving of tax incentives and to do so in meetings open to taxpayers.

The preliminary vote was to create a task force, which includes the mayor and several council members, to review development proposals for taxpayer support. This was a compromise forged out of the ongoing community debate over the proposed CentrePointe development.

Under the best-case scenario, city officials would have set financing priorities, based on the Downtown Master Plan, which was drafted with considerable public input.

G-8 Summit Tue, 08 Jul 2008 08:04 EDT

Musings: Rain, rain go away

Chinese Dir