Come over and see us at https://conservativethoughts.us

AND don’t forget to update those bookmarks!

(a)

By Rinaldo Del Gallo, III

If you look at the front page of the March 1st Pittsfield Gazette (a weekly Pittsfield, MA paper), one reads, “Race, class affect graduation rates.” In the March 14th Berkshire Eagle, the Pittsfield Massachusetts daily paper, the take was on a local community group that had won some grants for local initiatives. According to the Eagle, the grants were “to keep youths, particularly minorities, in school.” As Pittsfield Superintendent Darlington was making presentations to both the school committee and the city council regarding the disparities caused by race and economic class, virtually every local media outlet turned out for the Women of Color Giving Circle press conference. In the mean time, the Berkshire Coalition’s press releases about fatherlessness and the academic gender gap were ignored.

When our schools look at a child that is failing, they first see a black child, they then see poverty, they then see a boy, and they then see a child without a father (if they notice his fatherlessness at all). If we are to be serious about our high school dropout rate, we need to see these children in the reverse—as fatherless first, boys second, poor third, and black fourth. While I cannot possibly cover the entirety of this subject in this letter, the reader is directed to our website (BerkshireFatherhood.com), where there is a lengthy essay with volumes of supporting documents and even some podcasts of great interest on this subject.

In Pittsfield, according to the school system’s own numbers as measured by No Child Left Behind, 46.5% of blacks graduated, 40% of Hispanics graduated, as compared to 70.2% for whites. 41.3% of those classified as “low income” also graduated. As dramatic as these numbers may be, they pale by orders of multiples compared to the graduation rates of children from households with and without fathers.

While whites are 1.76 times as likely to graduate than Hispanics from Pittsfield’s schools, according to numbers from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Educational Statistics, children from homes with fathers are nine times more likely to graduate. Assuming the U.S. government’s and the Pittsfield School system’s numbers are correct, as dramatic as the white and Hispanic differential is, these numbers are dwarfed by the father/fatherless fraction by a factor of slightly over five fold. According to the National Principle’s Association, 71% of all dropouts come from fatherless homes. As for local numbers in Pittsfield, local officials have no interest in keeping statistics regarding graduation rates and the presence of fathers, and No Child Left Behind requires no measurements to be kept.

The data are clear. Fatherlessness is a far greater predictor of the likelihood of not graduating from high school than race or poverty status. The first sentence of the Berkshire Eagle article was, “The key to understanding why students drop out of school starts with a basic question: How was your day?” Indeed this is correct. It is a question that most divorced fathers in this country never get to ask, and that is precisely the problem.

The liberal agenda has so devalued the role of a father in the lives of their children that when evaluating increases in dropout rates; their absense was not even considered as a possible cause.  Look at the statistics in this article 71% of all dropouts come from fatherless homes.  Political correctness forces us to only focus on ‘race’ and ‘class’ and totally ignore single parent homes. The destruction of the traditional two parent family has removed one of the most important ingredients in raising a well-adjusted productive member of society; a father.

By Rinaldo Del Gallo, III

If you look at the front page of the March 1st Pittsfield Gazette (a weekly Pittsfield, MA paper), one reads, “Race, class affect graduation rates.” In the March 14th Berkshire Eagle, the Pittsfield Massachusetts daily paper, the take was on a local community group that had won some grants for local initiatives. According to the Eagle, the grants were “to keep youths, particularly minorities, in school.” As Pittsfield Superintendent Darlington was making presentations to both the school committee and the city council regarding the disparities caused by race and economic class, virtually every local media outlet turned out for the Women of Color Giving Circle press conference. In the mean time, the Berkshire Coalition’s press releases about fatherlessness and the academic gender gap were ignored.

When our schools look at a child that is failing, they first see a black child, they then see poverty, they then see a boy, and they then see a child without a father (if they notice his fatherlessness at all). If we are to be serious about our high school dropout rate, we need to see these children in the reverse—as fatherless first, boys second, poor third, and black fourth. While I cannot possibly cover the entirety of this subject in this letter, the reader is directed to our website (BerkshireFatherhood.com), where there is a lengthy essay with volumes of supporting documents and even some podcasts of great interest on this subject.

In Pittsfield, according to the school system’s own numbers as measured by No Child Left Behind, 46.5% of blacks graduated, 40% of Hispanics graduated, as compared to 70.2% for whites. 41.3% of those classified as “low income” also graduated. As dramatic as these numbers may be, they pale by orders of multiples compared to the graduation rates of children from households with and without fathers.

While whites are 1.76 times as likely to graduate than Hispanics from Pittsfield’s schools, according to numbers from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Educational Statistics, children from homes with fathers are nine times more likely to graduate. Assuming the U.S. government’s and the Pittsfield School system’s numbers are correct, as dramatic as the white and Hispanic differential is, these numbers are dwarfed by the father/fatherless fraction by a factor of slightly over five fold. According to the National Principle’s Association, 71% of all dropouts come from fatherless homes. As for local numbers in Pittsfield, local officials have no interest in keeping statistics regarding graduation rates and the presence of fathers, and No Child Left Behind requires no measurements to be kept.

The data are clear. Fatherlessness is a far greater predictor of the likelihood of not graduating from high school than race or poverty status. The first sentence of the Berkshire Eagle article was, “The key to understanding why students drop out of school starts with a basic question: How was your day?” Indeed this is correct. It is a question that most divorced fathers in this country never get to ask, and that is precisely the problem.

The liberal agenda has so devalued the role of a father in the lives of their children that when evaluating increases in dropout rates; their absense was not even considered as a possible cause.  Look at the statistics in this article 71% of all dropouts come from fatherless homes.  Political correctness forces us to only focus on ‘race’ and ‘class’ and totally ignore single parent homes. The destruction of the traditional two parent family has removed one of the most important ingredients in raising a well-adjusted productive member of society; a father.

Eugene A. Marriott raped, sodomized and brutally beat a woman outside a Best Western Motel in Fairfax City on January 14, 2006. He was pulling up his pants, with the woman still lying at his feet, when police arrived and arrested him. An eyewitness to the crime said he was in an adjacent parking lot and saw Marriott standing over top of the woman and “just pounding away on her.” He yelled at Marriott but he continued his attack on the woman.

Marriott who is married is also a minister in The Ebenezer African Methodist Episcopal Church in Fort Washington. After his arrest he told detectives investigating the case that he’d dated the woman and what happened on January 14th was simply a matter of their sadomasochistic role-playing. The woman, however, told detectives they’d broken up weeks earlier. But during the course of his interview with police he admitted that even if it had been role-playing that what he did that night was wrong.

Marriott entered a plea to charges of abduction with intent to defile and unlawful wounding, with the abduction with intent charge carrying a minimum sentence of 20 years. With his agreement to plead to those charges, prosecutors dismissed the rape and sodomy counts. But during trial proceedings prosecutors amended the charges to simple adduction, which carried no minimum sentence and a maximum of 10 years. They also added two misdemeanor sexual battery charges, to which Marriott agreed to plead guilty.

By pleading guilty to the two misdemeanor charges he escaped having to register as a sex offender, which would have been required by the “intent to defile” charge.

Assistant Commonwealth’s Attorney Toni Fay presented the case and said that what happened that night was criminal behavior and showed photos of the victim to Circuit Court Judge Stanley Klein. Pictures offered into evidence showed that the victim had sustained cuts and bruises over her body from her lower legs to the top of her head. The victim said that she’d been beaten with fists and a belt buckle, raped and sexually assaulted. But, according to the Washington Post, Fay concluded her case by saying,

“I wish Mr. Marriott well. I hope that his wife takes him back. I am very glad to see his church and his community are still supporting him.”

I’m surprised that she didn’t invite him out for dinner and drinks. Perhaps I missed something in the translation of all of this, but I was under the impression that Eugene A. Marriott was the accused in this instance, not the victim. Yet, it seems that the Fairfax County Prosecutor’s Office, or at least Toni Fay, went out of her way to assist him in eluding prosecution for the most serious crimes.

Marriott’s capacity as a minister at the Ebenezer AME Church doesn’t entitle him to preferential treatment when he stands accused of a serious crime, or any crime for that matter. He said he was sorry, but showed no emotion when he apologized. He went on to say that he’d lost everything he’d worked his whole life for, but continued to have the support of his church and his wife. The victim admitted she had dated him for about three months and their break up had been amicable. Although the victim dated her attacker for a time and agreed to meet him to go dancing on the night of the attack, it doesn’t qualify him for leniency. Indeed the court saw otherwise and sentenced him to only 16 months for his crimes immediately after sentencing two burglars to 18 and 20 months in prison. First, the prosecutor slaps the victim across the face by wishing her attacker well and then the court puts its stamp of approval on the slap with a kick in the stomach and a sentence of only 16 months for a violent crime. Yet, Judge Klein said Marriott’s behavior wouldn’t be tolerated.

I don’t understand how a brutal beating and rape warrants less time in prison than a property crime. What was the court saying not only to the victim in this case, but also to the thousands of victims of rape and sexual assault across the country? Was the court sending a message that forcibly violating a woman’s body will get a suspect less jail time than a break in of a home or business?

Like it or not, there are many times when there is no real justice for the victim in the judicial system. But in this case far more went on behind the scenes than anyone was aware of. Toni Fay reduced the charges without consulting with the victim, the detective who investigated the allegations or her boss, Commonwealth’s Attorney Robert F. Horan.

The victim had already agreed with a deal struck by the prosecutor that Marriott would plead guilty to abduction with intent to defile and should have been consulted by Fay prior to any change in that deal. According to Mr. Horan, and anyone familiar with the justice system knows, contacting the victim regarding any changes to the agreement is rule number one. Horan said the original plea agreement made sense and that lawyers who have defended accused rapists agreed, as did the victim in this instance.

Some time before the hearing Marriott’s attorney, Bobby Stafford, contacted Fay and told her that Marriott did not want to have to register as a sex offender, which would have been required under the “intent to defile” charge. Fay was then in touch with Judge Klein, telling him that she and Stafford had been in contact to resolve the matter, but without informing him of just what that matter was. But at the time of sentencing neither the judge nor the attorneys made mention of the fact that the charges had been altered.

The 35-year-old victim in this case said she was shocked to learn that the charges had been reduced without notifying her and was further angered by the lenient sentence.

Her outrage was supported by May Lou Leary, executive director of the National Center for Victims of Crime. Leary said that when offenders are allowed to avoid responsibility for their crimes it has an effect on all victims and especially victims of sex crimes. Sexual assault is a violent crime that is about domination and control of the victim and what happened in this case reinforces that.

In some ways Judge Klein’s hands were tied when he sentenced Marriott, but if he wanted to give the victim some measure of satisfaction and justice he had options available to him. At sentencing he ordered Marriott to serve four years on each of the abduction and unlawful wounding counts, but then suspended all but 16 months of the terms. He then passed six-month sentences down on the two sexual battery counts and ordered all time to be served concurrently. If he so desired he could’ve ordered those sentences to be served consecutively in lieu of concurrently and Marriott would have been given at least nine years behind bars. Still, even the nine years would have been a far cry from the minimum of 20 demanded by the abduction with intent to defile charge.

There was a grave miscarriage of justice in this case and another black eye for the judicial system as a whole. Commonwealth’s Attorney Robert Horan, who has always seemed to be a cut above when it came to fairness throughout the judicial process, is now faced with having to conduct damage control to repair the harm done to the reputation of his office.

Still, what happened in this case leaves me, and I’m certain hundreds of others, wondering just went on behind the scenes to cause such a lucrative deal to be struck. The flag of suspicion should be waving, and rightly so, because of the actions of Defense Attorney Bobby Stafford and Commonwealth’s Attorney Toni Fay. There are many questions in this case and I’m certain that Mr. Horan will live up to his reputation for fairness and honesty and demand the answers. Unfortunately the damage has already been done to Mr. Horan’s office and not only the victim in this case, but also the countless other victims across the country have been slapped in the face.

From Yahoo/AFP:

A woman judge has refused a Moroccan-born woman permission to file for divorce by interpreting the Koran as allowing husbands to beat their wives.

“Where are we living? Woman judge allows beating in marriage… and invokes the Koran,” said a front-page headline in Germany’s top-selling Bild newspaper, reflecting the widespread angry reaction on Thursday.

“This Moroccan woman has the same right to protection from a violent husband as any German woman. Anything else would be misconceived sensitivity to the benefit of the husband and would amount to racist discrimination against the wife,” said the Tageszeitung daily.

The Central Council of Muslims in Germany also condemned the decision. “The judge should have made a decision based on the German constitution instead of the Koran,” said spokeswoman Nurhan Soykan, who said that violence and mistreatment, regardless of the gender of the victim, were also grounds for divorce in the Islamic world.

A court in the western city of Frankfurt on Wednesday upheld a complaint of bias against the judge lodged by the lawyer of the 26-year-old woman, who has two children.

The woman had filed for immediate divorce on the grounds that the husband, also of Moroccan origin, regularly beat her and threatened to kill her. The claims were backed up by a police report. But the female judge, who has not been named, made clear in a letter that the wife’s bid had little chance of approval because, according to her, Islamic law allowed a man to strike his wife.

I am actually speechless on this one. I am not an expert on German law or the judicial system there. But I am sure that the majority of Germans are not ready to submit to Sharia law. This case is a sure thing for reversal on appeal. I question the competency of this judge that would even entertain the use of a religious book from such a violent and barbaric religion in her decision.

Love. This a word that stirs the deepest passions of everyone of us whether we be young or old, boy or girl or man or woman. Numerous acts of kindness and cruelty have been done in the name of Love. No scientist can put a sample under a microscope and analysis it, nor can a biologist dissect it and tell us how it works. Yet each and every one of us are either directly or indirectly affected by this four letter word called love. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. wrote in one of his letters while in prison in Birmingham, Alabama said “We are all bound together by a single cord of mutualability. What directly affects one of us, indirectly affects all of us.”

I recently read an article on the renewamerica.us website dated March 19, 2007, titled What needs to be renewed in our nation? The author stated that “virtually ALL the people who came to the shores of America professed openly their belief in God and in the Lordship of Jesus Christ.” They were people of faith that trusted in God and Loved him with all their hearts. They were very learned in the bible and built their lives around God and their community.

They cheerfully helped each other to clear the lands and build their homes and barns. After working extremely hard together during the week they came together again to worship and thank almighty God for blessing them and watching over them and their families. They honored Jesus Christ as their personal savior who died for their sins and arose from the grave with weekly church services attended by virtually everyone in the village. The Pastor would read from the scriptures the texts that says “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like namely this, thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.” Matthew 12:30-31. They deeply believed that when you love someone like you want to be loved, and treat others as you want to be treated, then you won’t steal from them, lie against them, kill them, or rape and kill their sons and daughters.

There were very few if any bars, strip clubs, crack houses or houses of prostitution in their communities. In fact the crime rate was almost nonexistent. If someone violated their laws they were punished in accordance to the moral standards of their day using the bible that they based their lives on to judge the person. They had deep reverence to God and biblical brotherly love for one another.

Jesus said to his disciples in John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another, as I have loved you, that ye also love one another. By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.” This text was evidently lived out in the lives of the first settlers in our nation’s history. Even when they encountered the native American Indians of the land, they greeted them with godly love and acceptance. They were not bigoted or prejudice in their perceptions of others different from themselves.

The title of this article is that we as a nation have left our First Love. What attributes of love have we lost today that the first Americans had when they settled this great land? Was it their strong work ethic, or their burning desire to escape from the rule of King George? Could it had been their spirit of adventurism that caused them to forsake everything in England and come to a new land with their families and virtually all they own?

I strongly believe that they were divinely inspired and directly led by the Spirit of the Living God. God who knows our tomorrow’s better than we know our yesterdays guided them to this great land and gave them the same charge that he gave Adam and Eve. They were to be fruitful and multiply and keep the land and till the soil. The first settlers did that and a nation was born to become what it is today in a few hundred years. They freely acknowledged God as sovereign in their lives. They based all their decisions after hours of prayers on God’s holy word. In the book of Revelation chapter 2:3-5 Apostle John writes to the first church of Ephesus, “And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name sake hast labored, and hast not fainted. Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.” God further warned them that to get back to their first love they must repent or reverse course. This text was written about 60 years after the crucifixion (aprox. 96AD). The church at Ephesus to whom this letter was addressed had forgotten the most important part of their lives. They were commended for their works but chastised for not keeping God as the center and source of their successes.

Today as a nation we have taken God out of nearly every aspect of our society. Starting with prayer from our schools. Now look at our schools today. School shootings, teachers having sex with students, kids that cannot read or write at grade school levels being graduated, and the bible clubs being kept out and the Gay and lesbian clubs being welcomed in with open arms. Also the stain of the blood of innocent babies through abortion, and a crime rate that is staggering and ever increasing. Brotherly love and kindness has long departed and his been replace with distrust of anyone outside of the immediate family.

After the earthquake that hit anchorage Alaska on Good Friday in 1964, nearly the whole city went to church. They went to repent and ask God to have mercy on them and their city. But after a short period of time the city of Anchorage went back to their old ways. I lived their for 17 years and I left in 1990. There are many churches there but many of the people still don’t take God serious enough to change their ways and come to him.

After 911 (I live in upstate New York), all the churches around here were once again filled with people. Our very way of life was forever changed and again after a short period of time the churches went back to their pre 911 levels. What will it take for our nation to once again return to our First Love?

I believe that unless our nation truly repents and turn our hearts again unto the things that made the first Americans strong, we will not escape the judgment and wrath of almighty God. I am not a doom and gloomier, nor am I a pessimistic person that always looks for the worst in any given situation. I believe we can once again return to our First Love and take our nation back to it roots in God and his leadings in our lives and in the lives of our leaders.

II Chronicles 7:14 gives us the way back to our first love saying, “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” May God help us to chose wisely and rightly before it is too late.

Becoming Illegal (Actual letter from an Iowa resident and sent to his senator

The Honorable Tom Harkin
731 Hart Senate Office Building
Phone (202) 224 3254
Washington D C, 20510

Dear Senator Harkin,

As a native Iowan and excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you. My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal Alien stems from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding of this bill’s provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when I see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.

Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I’m excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year. Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as “in-state” tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.

Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver’s license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.

If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal(retroactively if possible)and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative. Thank you for your assistance.

Your Loyal Constituent,
Donald Ruppert
Burlington, IA

It is a fact that since the 1960’s, school children have been taught to equate the Democratic Party with civil rights and are also taught that the Republican Party was on the wrong side of history. Both the media and educators have drummed this terrible myth into the heads of children. But what is not reported is that for 150 years, the Republican Party has held the banner for civil rights while the Democratic Party defended slavery, segregation and allied itself with the Klu Klux Klan. The Democratic Party well into the 20th century were part of the Klan and were only Johnny come lately’s of the civil rights movement in the 1960s.

An example of a member of the Democratic Party and an elected official for more than 60 years is Senator Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia. He joined the Klu Klux Klan in the 1940’s and became a leader named “Exalted Cyclops.” In a letter to Graham Smith, in the 1940’s Byrd wrote, ” With a Negro by my side. Rather I should die a thousand times and then to see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, then to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the black specimen from the wilds.”

The party of Lincoln and Frederick Douglass ( the Martin Luther King Jr. of the 19th century,) is still the GOP of today. From the past there are other Republicans that we may be proud of such as Salmon P. Chase who earned the nickname ” Attorney General of Fugitive Slaves” for defending runaway slaves. The most famous runaway of course was Frederick Douglass, who said “The Republican Party is the ship and all else is the sea.” A Republican Congress after the Civil War passed a Civil Rights Act and three constitutional amendments: abolishing slavery, guaranteeing equal protection of the law and securing voting rights. This same Congress gave individual right to bear arms as needed for blacks and others to protect themselves from the Klu Klux Klan.

A Conservative Republican Senator, Joseph Hawley, dissented from the “separate but equal” ) ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) declaring “our Constitution is colorblind.” It became the rallying cry of the NAACP in their later battles to undo segregation that was imposed on the South by the Democratic Party. It’s first President Moorefield Storey, denounced President Woodrow Wilson’s segregation of the federal government and won the first Supreme Court case ruling residential segregation unconstitutional in 1917 ( 37 years before Brown v, Board of Education. A Republican business philanthropist Julius Rosenwald, the head of Sears & Roebuck, said, “give while you live” and was responsible for the creation of 5,000 “Rosenwald Schools” in the South for poor black children.

During WWII Democratic President Franklin Roosevelt refused to take his photo with Blacks while Republicans called for desegregation of the military, anti lynching laws and the right to vote for Blacks. In 1964, Democratic President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act but only after the Republicans introduced their own bill and overcame a Democratic filibuster. Republicans voted by 89% in favor for the Civil Rights Act while the Democrats mustered a bare majority.

Republicans should be recognized by the media and educators for their contributions to end racial discrimination and the Party today is still very much the party of Lincoln.

Last Friday, March 9, 2007 the UN wrapped up its annual session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women. Guess where they found a violation of women’s rights? Among the hundreds of thousands of women who are dead, dying, mutilated, displaced or raped in Sudan? Among the million female migrant workers cowering in the basements of Saudi Arabian villas from the taskmasters who stole their passports the minute they got off the plane? Among the women stoned and hanged for “adultery” in Iran? The millions of women forcibly aborted in China? The thousands murdered or forced to commit suicide for the crime of “dishonoring” their fathers and brothers across the Arab and Muslim world?If you guessed “none of the above,” then you’ll enjoy coming on down to the UN. The UN’s lead body charged with promoting and protecting women’s rights identifies only one state as violating the rights of women in the world today – Israel.(Violating the rights of Palestinian women.) The vote was 40 for and 2 against (the United States and Canada).

Germany, on behalf of the European Union, gave a one minute “explanation” excusing its affirmative vote. It said: “we express our deep concerns for the impact on all women in the region including the Israeli women” – although Germany did not insist such language be inserted in the resolution itself. For 60 seconds, the representative of the country where millions of Jewish women and girls were murdered en masse not so long ago took notice of the Jewish mothers and daughters who have fallen victim to terrorism in the Jewish state. This is the moral corruption that the UN breeds within democracies like Germany. In the United Nations, an institution owned and directed by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, the European Union grovels while the real abusers cheer.

Why are we wasting our time and money on this USELESS organization? Israel is a DEMOCRACY; they have the rule of law; they do not have the ‘fashion police’ running around ensuring that women are dressed according to government regulation or the state religion. Women can vote, be employed at all levels of business and run for office. Israeli women are allowed to drive a car and even go to the grocery store WITHOUT a male escort.

What despicable acts has Israel committed against women that surpasses Iran and Saudi Arabia?

The horrible crime is erecting a security wall for their country to keep out Hamas militants and suicide bombers; this is the cause of all Palestinian women’s woes. The religion of peace which forces them into virtual servitude, honor killings, forced marriages and rape all of these problems will simply evaporate once that wall is removed. Ridiculous.

The vote was 40-2 here is the breakdown:

Favor: Algeria, Armenia, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, China, Congo, Croatia, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Germany, Ghana, Hungary, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran, Japan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, Nigeria, Peru, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Suriname, Thailand, Togo, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania.

Against: Canada, United States

Absent: Cameroon, Lesotho, Zambia

Thank you Canada!! I would like to know what the United Kingdom was thinking when it cast its vote. What’s next for the U.N. ending the ‘hunger crisis’ in London?

Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Perri Nelson’s Website, A Blog For All, The Random Yak, Maggie’s Notebook, basil’s blog, Stuck On Stupid, The Amboy Times, sissunchi, third world county, Faultline USA, stikNstein… has no mercy, The World According to Carl, Pirate’s Cove, Overtaken by Events, and The Pink Flamingo, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.