Al Sharpton's Daughter, Ex-Wife Arrested for OH NO YOU DIDN'T

Rev. Al Sharpton's daughter told a police officer in a profanity-laden rant that she cut him off in traffic because she was in a rush to get to a theater, prosecutors said Monday.
"You were driving too slow. I have a play to go to," Dominique Sharpton told an officer who pulled her over Oct. 30, prosecutors told a Manhattan judge.
Dominique Sharpton and the civil rights activist's ex-wife, Kathy, face charges including resisting arrest after the Harlem traffic stop.

Defense lawyer Michael Hardy said the women simply exercised their free-speech rights to complain.
Police said Dominique Sharpton veered out of her lane, ran a red light and forced another car to swerve out of her way. After being ticketed, she and her mother cursed at the officers, ignored orders to return to their cars and resisted being handcuffed, according to a criminal complaint. Kathy Sharpton pushed an officer with her hands, police said in the complaint.
Hardy said he would ask the court to dismiss the charges, all misdemeanors or violations, calling them "frivolous" and saying there were no grounds for the arrest.
"Since when did a verbal objection become criminal in America?" Hardy said. More

Criminal Record May Not Prevent Gun Ownership

A federal appeals court has overturned the conviction of a Wisconsin man barred from owning firearms because of his criminal record, ruling the lifetime prohibition may violate Americans’ Second Amendment rights and calling into question the future of a 13-year old gun control law. In a 3-0 decision on Wednesday, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ordered a trial judge to take a second look at the evidence that a 1996 federal law prohibiting anyone convicted of a “misdemeanor crime of domestic violence” is constitutional in light of a U.S. Supreme Court ruling last year that emphasized “the individual right to possess and carry weapons.”
This case involves a man named Steven Skoien, who previously had been convicted of misdemeanor domestic battery. A year later, a Winchester 12-gauge hunting shotgun was discovered in a truck parked outside his home, along with evidence (including an orange hunting jacket, a deer carcass, and a state-issued tag for a deer kill) that he had used it earlier in the day. He was charged with illegal possession of a firearm.
irst, it shows that U.S. Justice Department has become a bit lazy in prosecuting gun cases: the court noted that “the government has made little effort to discharge its burden of demonstrating” the constitutionality of the law, and “relied almost entirely on conclusory reasoning by analogy.”
Second, and more importantly, this is one of the first appeals court cases to take an in-depth look at the impact of the Supreme Court’s ruling last year in D.C. v. Heller on existing federal firearms laws. It’s true that Justice Antonin Scalia’s majority opinion said: “Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill…” But misdemeanors are different from felonies, which the Seventh Circuit noted: “We therefore assume that Skoien’s Second Amendment rights are intact notwithstanding his misdemeanor domestic-violence conviction.” The judges said that the ownership ban is life-long and sweeping, providing no way for a now-peaceable citizen to seek an exception:more

lulac sues Ohio BMV

The League of United Latin American Citizens LULAC said that a new BMV policy requiring additional documentation proving citizenship is illegal. ”This requirement is not supported by Ohio law,” said LULAC’s Jose Luis Mas.

‘In order to obtain any Temporary Permit, Driver License, Commercial Driver License, State of Ohio Identification (ID) card or duplicate of any of these items, the customer must present a primary and asecondary document satisfactory to prove both: (1) Name and date of birth and (2) Social Security Number (SSN), if ever assigned; or two primary documents. The primary document shall contain the full legal name. In addition each applicant shall present along with the application identification, documents sufficient to establish the person’s true identity including the person’s full legal name, date of birth, legal presence in the United States,\’

LULAC announced it was suing the BMV. The bureau wants more than 47,000 drivers with questionable vehicle registrations to come in and prove who they are, but LULAC said the BMV is unfairly singling out Hispanics, Akers reported.
The BMV sent letters in October to people, it said do not have proper documents on file, asking them to provide a drivers license, identification card, or social security number.
Ohio Annual Traffic Crash Facts
“The majority of Ohio’s newly arrived immigrants do not have and cannot obtain any these documents,” Mas said. Undocumented immigrants face the loss of their cars and jobs without the ability to drive, the lawyers said. They said families, many with American-born children who are U.S. citizens, could be forced to relocate or separate,As of last week, 2,245 people had visited BMV offices and provided proof of legal U.S. residency. The Dispatch revealed on Sept. 13 that a loophole in Ohio law allowed thousands of undocumented workers to register vehicles even though many did not have valid Social Security numbers or vehicle insurance.
The immigrants hired “runners” with legal U.S. residency to register their cars with falsified power-of-attorney forms that did not require verification of the identity of vehicle owners. The forms only required Social Security numbers, which state officials could not verify.more

“There’s nothing in Ohio statute that justifies denial of the registration if you don’t provide a social security number,” said attorney Dennis Muchniki, who is representing LULAC. But BMV officials said their concern is public safety.A crash on New Years 2008 first raised concern when undocumented immigrant Alfonso Martinez wrecked his car while driving drunk.Source of Story

WILL MUSLIMS SERVE ON THE 911 MUSLIM TERRORIST JURY?

I am curious. Will Muslims be allowed to serve on the "trial" of the plotters of the September 11th Islamic attack on America that resulted in thousands of deaths?

Considering that we are, in effect, living under a quasi-soft sharia law, the answer to that question is, of course. There is no way Holder or any of the political elites will "profile" the jury. But they should. Will their religiosity be questioned? It should. It is germane. It is at the very core of the attack - the motivation.

Ruling on jury duty in a non-Islamic court in a non-Muslim country

Non-practicing Muslims, secular Muslims, apostates are fit to serve, but devout Muslims are not. Religious Muslims study and revere the same book as the 911 Muslims who invaded this country and attacked this country, wanting to bring it down and usher in an Islamic state. Religious Muslims believe in the same ideology that all jihadis believe in. It is Islam.

And if potential observant Muslims are queried about their allegiance, they will lie, as is their religious mandate. Taqiya, lying to advance Islam, is a religious mandate. It is your religious duty to advance Islam at any cost in servitude to allah.

Major Muslim Hasan would have made a perfect juror -- up until he mowed down scores of Americans at Fort Hood. Is that not right?

Will Muslims serve on the 911 jury? They should not.

On the Contrary: "Nazi Hunter sees threat worse than 'Holocaust Denial"

On the Contrary: "Nazi Hunter sees threat worse than 'Holocaust Denial"

Germans Violently Protest Opening 'Why Israel'

Prominent French Jewish filmmaker Claude Lanzmann expressed "shock" last week that German leftists in Hamburg had violently prevented the showing of his debut documentary film, Why Israel, about the role of the Jewish state as a homeland for refugees.

In late October, the 1973-produced film was scheduled to be shown at the B-Movie cinema, but roughly 50 left-wing activists from diverse anti-Israel groups affiliated with the anti-Zionist International Center B5 barred visitors from entering the movie house. In Why Israel, Lanzmann - perhaps best known for his groundbreaking documentary Shoah - depicts Israelis who found refuge in Israel

The movie house said in a statement that it had been compelled to cancel the film screening and a podium discussion because "we were threatened with violence."

According to eyewitness reports in the German media, left-wing protesters ranging in age from 16 to 70 shouted "Jewish pigs" and "faggots" to the cinema attendees. A pro-Israel left-of-center group, Kritikmaximierung, cosponsored the showing of thefilm. The protesters propagate an "anti-Semitic position" that views "Zionism as racist," said Pomrehn. The International Center B5 activists staged an
agitprop performance to block the guests' entry, setting up an Israeli military checkpoint with wooden military rifles. The protesters were armed with bicycle locks and wore fingerless fighting gloves.

The Future of Food