She wanted to prove there was no truth

August 8, 2011

Did she? She proved the system can be broken. She proved that facts can be subverted. Recorded conversations can be presented out of context. Legal occupants can let their bias towards class warfare based on gender guide their judgments. Lawyers can be bought. Power was proven to be based on elite relationships. Confessions can be squeezed out through intimidation. Speech can be silenced. Some blame the internet. Some say it would of never happened if I was not online…, but if this had happened one hundred years ago there might of never been records to free me. I might of actually had to really drink that hemlock. It would of cost me exponentially more to buy off a judge if she had come by horse in the 1800s, then to present irrefutable evidence that might still lead to my legal demise. Certainly they were still able to intimidate me into a confession. Certainly they can still silence me with threats. Certainly I am in danger merely by implying. The extent of censorship is not clear, it is left to the insane in power to have discretion. Certainly I can not say this person’s name still, but I am thankful for the information age. I am thankful that I can be silenced and yet the information out there can not be erased. I won even though I am legally guilty. There most certainly is a truth. That most ire; teeth clench. Those who deny G-d are shattered. The cult of victimization is based on a lie. The truth won the day. I might still be in danger. I might lose further legally. Shaking my conceptual genitals out there for the world to see. They might just still castrate me, but the truth still persists.

If I have no right, then how am I wrong?


Saudi Arabia: Stop Trial of Journalist Criminal Defamation Charges for Web Article Alleging Extortion

August 3, 2011

Al-Juhani accuses the head of al-Huta’s environmental health section of trying to pressure more than 200 shop owners into paying 5,000 Saudi riyals (US$1,333) each as a contribution to the annual banquet the municipality gives to mark the end of the fasting month Ramadan. The article says that the health inspector abused his position by threatening to impose fines against the shop owners if they failed to comply. Al-Juhani told Human Rights Watch that his sources were shop owners, a high municipal official, and a local journalist.
Al-Juhani also told Human Rights Watch that the health official filed a complaint against al-Juhani, asking the court to punish him and award official damages for harm suffered. The prosecutor, on December 6, 2010, charged al-Juhani with criminal defamation. Al-Juhani should not be criminally prosecuted for what he wrote, regardless of the truth of his allegations, because of the chilling effect of criminal sanctions on peaceful expression, Human Rights Watch said. If the official considers the article defamatory, he should file a civil suit for compensation for any claimed harm to his reputation. In considering civil suits, Saudi courts should consider the importance of freedom of expression in respecting the right of journalists to write about public figures.

Saudi Arabia has no written criminal law defining defamation or any attendant penalties. Defining the elements of a crime and any penalty remains up to the individual judge’s interpretation of Sharia precepts. In addition to the country’s Sharia courts, there are executive tribunals for labor, commercial, and media disputes under the respective ministries. Although the tribunal judging press violations is not an independent court, in several cases Saudi journalists preferred that this executive body rather than Sharia courts review matters relating to the media. Sharia courts in the 2005 and 2006 have tried cases for criminal defamation in media publications before ministerial instructions transferred them to the Culture and Information Ministry.via

…that is if you trust my source… which has not been reputable in regards to Israel. I do admit that it gets redundant to point out the flaws in Saudi society and I suppose HRW does it to show that there is some kind of fairness.  The reality is there isn’t.  This story is probably not outstanding.  The irony is in America today… especially in the state of Washington we have a situation where the state is doing to same thing to men and they do it for feminists.  The ability to write the TRUTH (even if you disagree about what TRUTH is) should not be taken away.

The Jews in the Basement

July 23, 2011
We have an angry Jewish feminist writing about Pamela Waechter. I hear her anger, but she blames Jewish men…

The coming week marks five years since the murder of Pamela Waechter. Who? If the name doesn’t ring a bell, here’s a brief reminder: She was shot in the head by Naveed Afzal Haq, as she tried to crawl down a flight of stairs and escape, after Haq shot her in the chest.

….Still not jogging your memory? How about this: Waechter was the 58-year-old director of the annual campaign of the Jewish Federation of Seattle. Sometime around 4 PM, on July 28, 2006, Naveed Afzal Haq grabbed a 14-year-old girl and thrust a gun in her back. He used her to gain entry to the Federation, and then rampaged through the building, shooting six women — Layla Bush, Christina Rexroad, Cheryl Stumbo, Dayna Klein (who was five months pregnant), Carol Goldman, and, fatally, Pamela Waechter. Tammy Kaiser jumped from a second-story window to escape, and was hospitalized with injuries.

Pamela Waechter

What was Haq’s motive? Well, here’s an interesting clue: As he stormed through the halls, shooting and killing, he shouted, “I’m a Muslim-American! I’m angry at Israel!”

…And yet, the images of the Seattle women under attack are so unbearable that the question must be shrieked from the rooftops: Where are the men?

By Stella Paul via 

she goes on…
….And the Jewish men are very busy, you see, cowering in the basement.  In 1903, the great poet, Chaim Nachman Bialik, was sent to report on the Kishinev massacre of Jews in Russia.  Bialik was shocked by what he learned of the men’s passivity, as their women were raped and murdered before their eyes.  He wrote a searing poem, “The City of Slaughter,” excoriating the men hiding in the cellar, who silently watched their loved ones’ destruction:

In that dark corner, and behind that cask
Crouched husbands, bridegrooms, brothers, peering from the cracks,
Watching the sacred bodies struggling underneath
The bestial breath,
Stifled in filth, and swallowing their blood!

where are the Jewish men in Seattle five years later? In jail and first amendment rights were taken away… not to mention other rights like right to be read my rights on arrest or right to avoid being a Jew put in a cage with a bunch of skinheads. Physical intimidation to plead guilty. A right to a fair trial when virtually tarred and feathered on the news. told by Muslim guards  named Mohammad before extradition that we can not pray in Hebrew because it is elitist. Of course Palestinian sympathizers couldn’t possibly be involved because the judge doesn’t believe that has anything to do with it… it isn’t like there isn’t violence associated with it’s sympathizers. and it isn’t like as if we might have any documents that just might prove that a non Jew was very preoccupied with what she called, “Nazi Sympathizing Jews”. It isn’t like as if a woman left it completely vague as to who these Jews were…. maybe the Jews she knew or the Jews she knew in the past? You know? Zionists? But she leaves it vague… leaving it to her listener to attack any Jew. the truth is only the accused know. It couldn’t be… that could not of happened… because as we all know… It could not be written about… because how ? …the right to blog is was taken away from us.  Arrested for writing without a previous arrest. Writing on a private facebook profile. Prior Restraint? It could not be that which happened. There could not of been evidence that a person was insane making the allegations and the authority ignored that anyway. There could not of been evidence that the woman was a stalker…. nah… could not of happened. Should this little excerpt be a reason to arrest again… it may not be this person talking… it might be someone else. How could anyone know the context of all of this? of course they will jump to a conclusion anyway… because we are talking about a man… and we are talking about Washington state… where the ladies have problems with men… how do they expect us to stand up for women when we can’t even legally talk about gender online without being censored and arrested? So is this the MAN IN THE GLASS HOUSE? I hear he dresses in the basement.  Washington State men are second class citizens. Yes the ladies get violated… sometimes even killed. And now our rights as men are taken away. We can not stand up for our community if you deny us men fairness because of our gender.

Please Don’t Say Mean Things About Me! 

May 17, 2011

When we get passed all that foolishness we are left with Joseph Rakofsky, the naked, web site self proclaimed emperor of the criminal law bar who wants one thing.  He wants the Internet to stop saying mean things about him.  He has sued the Internet to make it happen. He is asking the court to engage in what we call “prior restraint.   The 1st Amendment to the Constitution says that’s a no no.  So will the court if it get’s that far.   I guess Joseph was out creating his internet “brand” when he missed that concept in Constitutional Law  along with Criminal law, Procedure and Legal Ethics at the acclaimed Touro Law School.  I am confident that at some point Joe will exercise some retroactive prior restraint on himself, shut up and go away.  With his demonstrated internet marketing prowess, he will not doubt be able to totally re-invent himself.  If there is anything he is competent at, its that. via