February 29, 2016


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trump-declines-to-condemn-kkk-leader-david-duke/

Donald Trump declines to condemn KKK leader
By REENA FLORES CBS NEWS
February 28, 2016, 3:04 PM

Play VIDEO -- Trump security ruffles protesters making KKK comparisons


When he was given the opportunity to denounce Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke on a political talk show on Sunday, Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump declined to take it.

During the CNN interview, "State of the Union" host Jake Tapper asked the billionaire: "Will you unequivocally condemn David Duke and say that you don't want his vote or that of other white supremacists in this election?"

Trump told CNN: "I don't know anything about David Duke, okay? I don't know anything about what you're even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists."

Last week Duke, a white nationalist and a former KKK grand wizard, urged his radio show listeners to vote for Trump, saying that a ballot cast against the New Yorker would be "treason to your heritage." He also called Trump's candidacy an "insurgency that is waking up millions of Americans" and prompted his fellow nationalists to volunteer for the campaign.

Shortly after Duke announced his support, the Anti-Defamation League urged Trump to "distance" himself from the prominent Klan figure.

But on Sunday, when pressed again if he would condemn Duke, Trump responded that he'd "have to look at the group."

"You wouldn't want me to condemn a group that I know nothing about. I would have to look. If you would send me a list of the groups, I will do research on them," he said. "And, certainly, I would disavow if I thought there was something wrong."

Tapper questioned: "The Ku Klux Klan?"

"But you may have groups in there that are totally fine," the GOP candidate shot back. "And it would be very unfair. So, give me a list of the groups, and I will let you know."

Trump's final words on the subject: "Honestly, I don't know David Duke. I don't believe I have ever met him. I'm pretty sure I didn't meet him. And I just don't know anything about him."

A look back at Trump's involvement in politics, however, indicates that he had been, in fact, familiar with Duke in the past.

In 2000, after Trump decided he would not launch a presidential campaign as part of the Reform Party, he issued a statement that derided the KKK figurehead.

"The Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. [Pat] Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. [Lenora] Fulani," Trump said. "This is not company I wish to keep."

And during a Friday press conference, Trump had indicated that he would "disavow" Duke.

Trump also made waves Sunday morning for another race-related comment during a separate interview with Fox News.

When asked about a court case involving fraud claims against Trump University currently playing out in New York, the White House hopeful said the judge presiding over the issue "has been extremely hostile to me."

"I think it has to do with perhaps the fact that I'm very, very strong on the border," Trump said. "Very, very strong on the border. And he has been extremely hostile to me."

He added of the judge: "Now, he is Hispanic, I believe. He is a very hostile judge to me. I said it loud and clear."

When asked by Fox News why he bothered to bring up the judge's ethnicity, Trump blamed it on the television host, Chris Wallace.

"Because you always bring it up, Chris," Trump accused. "Because you always say how the Hispanics don't like Donald Trump. You always bring it up in your poll numbers. You say that Hispanics don't like Donald Trump. You're the one that brings it up."

Trump's recent antics are providing ample fodder for his rivals -- particularly Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio.

On Sunday, both Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio chimed in on the "abhorrent" KKK and Trump's lackluster response.

Tweets:

Ted Cruz ✔ ‎@tedcruz
Really sad. @realDonaldTrump you're better than this. We should all agree, racism is wrong, KKK is abhorrent. https://twitter.com/cnn/status/703955338589036545 …
12:11 PM - 28 Feb 2016

Marco Rubio ✔ ‎@marcorubio
We cannot be a party that nominates someone who refuses to condemn white supremacists and the Ku Klux Klan.
1:49 PM - 28 Feb 2016

And Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders weighed in Sunday via Twitter:

Bernie Sanders ✔ ‎@BernieSanders
America's first black president cannot and will not be succeeded by a hatemonger who refuses to condemn the KKK.
2:17 PM - 28 Feb 2016

Rival Hillary Clinton also retweeted Sanders' post.

Even Trump's surrogates are having a hard time defending Trump's campaign and presidential platforms.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who endorsed Trump on Friday and who has since hit the trail to stump for his one-time rival, admitted in a television interview that "of course there are things I disagree with" Trump about.

"Donald Trump and I are not going to agree on every issue," Christie told ABC News.

He added, for instance, that "the idea of banning all Muslims from this country is ridiculous, and the reason it's ridiculous is because you don't need to do that to make America safe."

"When Donald Trump said that, he was dead wrong. And he's dead wrong now," Christie said.

The former 2016 candidate also shrugged off questions about how Trump would accomplish his campaign promises, particularly border wall that the businessman has repeatedly said he would force Mexico to pay for.

"The fact is that he's going to have to answer that question," Christie said. "He will."



Trump is an opportunist who wants as much personal attention as he can get, and what would be better than being President? To some degree that's common to most politicians, but some do have more devotion to helping their fellow man than others. He says the first thing that hits his head sometimes as a joke, and then makes a contradictory statement later when he is pressed about it. In this case, rather than speaking against the former head of the KKK as he did in 2000, he says now that he doesn’t know who he is! Ridiculous! Almost everybody in the US knows who David Duke is, and that the KKK is a violent hate group.

We must remember that groups and people like that are not “conservative,” but radicals and terrorists. If you don’t believe that, look at the KKKs earlier history when they burned black churches, killed “uppity” blacks outright, threatened anybody white or otherwise who gave them any support, or who dared to speak out against the White Supremacist political candidates who in the South dominated the scene both locally and statewide. There were even some members of the legislature in the 50s, 60s and even the 70s who had a history of KKK membership.

Modern day KKK members, as they undoubtedly did also in the past, have infiltrated certain police departments and state governments. One woman officer was recently demoted or perhaps fired for transmitting racist emails among the police department. Some fire departments also have mistreated black firemen, in one case putting a noose on his bed. Another time a picture of a monkey was posted on their website with a racist comment. Painfully, countless other such things have been done by our “good” citizens against President Obama.

Not all white people by any means are of this stripe, but there is enough of this poison in our society these days that it sickens and angers me. I do hope a good Democrat will be elected in 2016 who will replace Scalia on the Supreme Court and carry some more liberal legislators on his/her coattails. In almost a week I will be able to go vote for Sanders. I can’t wait!


About the Reform Party of 1990:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reform_Party_of_the_United_States_of_America

Reform Party of the United States of America
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the party founded by Ross Perot. For the competing party founded in 1997, see American Reform Party.

The Reform Party of the United States of America (RPUSA), generally known as the Reform Party USA or the Reform Party, is a political party in the United States, founded in 1995 by Ross Perot.

Perot, who had run as an Independent in the 1992 presidential election and wanted to participate also in the 1996 presidential election, thought Americans were disillusioned with the state of politics as being corrupt and unable to deal with vital issues. Perot claimed to represent a viable alternative to Republicans and Democrats.

The party has nominated several notable candidates over the years, such as Perot himself, Pat Buchanan, and Ralph Nader, but its most significant victory came when Jesse Ventura was elected Governor of Minnesota in 1998.

2000 presidential election[edit]

The Reform Party's presidential candidate for the 2000 election was due federal matching funds of $12.5 million, based on Perot's 8% showing in 1996. Early on, there was a failed effort to draft Ron Paul.[3][5]

Donald Trump entered the race briefly, giving television interviews outlining his platform. Trump was progressive on social issues, and supported allowing openly gay soldiers in the military, saying: "it would not disturb me."[6] Trump considered himself a conservative, but criticized Pat Buchanan, saying: "I'm on the conservative side, but Buchanan is Attila the Hun."[7] He withdrew from the race citing the party's infighting,[8] as did Jesse Ventura and the Minnesota Reform Party. Donald Trump stated: "So the Reform Party now includes a Klansman, Mr. Duke, a neo-Nazi, Mr. Buchanan, and a communist, Ms. Fulani. This is not company I wish to keep.".[9][10] "Mr Duke" was a reference to David Duke, a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan.

Pat Buchanan decided to leave the Republican Party because: "The Republican Party at the national level has ceased to be my party. This divorce began around the end of the Cold War when President (George) Bush declared it to be a New World-order party and began intervening all over the world. While he and I were allies and friends during the Cold War, I just felt that once the Cold War was over the United States should return to a more traditional non-intervention foreign policy."[11]




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/5-klan-members-arrested-at-vicious-california-brawl-released/

5 Klan members arrested at vicious Calif. brawl released
CBS/AP
February 29, 2016, 5:00 AM

Photograph -- Violence broke out when counter-protesters arrived before a planned demonstration in Anaheim, California by KKK members on February 27, 2016 CBS LOS ANGELES


ANAHEIM, California -- Five Ku Klux Klan members who were arrested following a vicious brawl in Anaheim were released because evidence shows they acted in self-defense, police said.

Seven people who remained in custody were seen beating, stomping and attacking the Klansmen with wooden posts, Sgt. Daron Wyatt said Sunday.

A police statement said the clash, which erupted after six Klan members arrived at a park Saturday for a planned anti-immigration rally, was started by a larger group of 10 to 20 counter-protesters who had "the intent of perpetrating violence."

Police said the Klansmen stabbed three counter-protesters with knives and the decorative end of a flag pole.

"Regardless of an individual or groups' beliefs or ideologies, they are entitled to live without the fear of physical violence and have the right, under the law, to defend themselves when attacked," the statement said.

Mayhem ensued Saturday as soon as the Klan members pulled up in a black SUV for an anti-immigration rally they had advertised in advance and pulled out signs saying "White Lives Matter."

Dozens of protesters swarmed in and someone smashed a window. The SUV then sped away, leaving three Klansmen dressed in black shirts decorated with the Klan cross and Confederate flag patches outnumbered.

"(The counter-protesters) were so angry, they would have torn these folks limb from limb," said Brian Levin, who directs the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino. "I was afraid for their lives."

Levin, who went to Pearson Park expecting to record the rally for research, found himself protecting the Klansmen until police could intervene. On a video Levin shot and posted to Twitter, he later asked one of them, "How do you feel that a Jewish person helped save your life today?"

"I thank you. I thank you," said the Klansman, waving away the question with his blood-spattered arm. "I would have saved a colored man's life," he added.

Much of the clash was captured on video and posted online. In one, a man cries "I got stabbed," lifting his T-shirt to show a wound to his stomach. A fire hydrant where the man briefly sat was covered in blood.

Police told CBS Los Angeles they had determined that one Klan member was responsible for all three stabbings. They said he acted in self-defense.

Despite the change in tone from police, community activist Rev. James Stern told the station he is calling on the U.S. and California attorneys general to prosecute the Klan.

"We've known for a long history time, everywhere the KKK mobilized, they bring about violence, you don't bring a knife to a peaceful rally," Stern said.

Stern says the KKK -- or any other organized hate group -- should be indicted under the federal Rico Act, which is designed to combat organized crime and has been used in the past against L.A. street gangs.

"If it's not done, it's another form of racist, of justice for one group and not for the other," Stern says.

The reverend told CBS Los Angeles he is planning a news conference in Beverly Hills on Monday asking people of all races to come together against the KKK's hate.

As for Saturday's bloodshed, the DA will still need to review the police findings.

Like many other cities across the United States, Anaheim has a history intertwined with the KKK. What sets the city apart, however, is its decisive backlash after the Klan gained four of five City Council seats in 1924. Those Klansmen were ousted in a recall election after their affiliations with the Klan became public and following a nighttime KKK initiation rally that attracted an estimated 10,000 people to the city park where Saturday's violence erupted.

"The only reason we remember Anaheim for the Klan is because they fought the Klan so hard," said Phil Brigandi, an Orange County historian and author. "The more the Klan came out of the shadows, the more people became aware of it and the opposition grew."

In the near century since then, Anaheim has gone from 95 percent white to become 53 percent Hispanic and 27 percent white, according to data with the U.S. Census Bureau.

"We're a far cry from those terrible times and the Klan is really an anachronism," Levin said. "Anaheim is now a diverse community that is in many ways an amusement and sports capital of California. This is just an example of how a small group of people can tarnish the name of a community."

Rosa Madrigal, who was at the park Sunday with her husband and three children, said she was shocked to even hear about the KKK holding a rally in Anaheim, let alone the violence that ensued.

"I didn't even think it was true when I heard it," said Madrigal, 25. "It's crazy, especially in a park where you take your kids."

When the melee started, Levin said he saw no uniformed officers.

Wyatt said police were there and engaged with people at one end of the fight, and called for additional resources to deploy to the other end. The event stretched along an entire city block, he said.

Police Chief Raul Quezada said his officers were able to respond quickly enough to arrest all but one of the main participants, a counter-protester who remains at-large.

The Klan members were booked for investigation of assault with a deadly weapon before being released. The seven people who remained in custody were booked for assault with a deadly weapon or elder abuse for stomping on a Klan member who's older than 65 years old, Wyatt said.

Though the Klan members were released, prosecutors will review the case and decide whether to file criminal charges, he said.

Chris Barker, who identified himself as the imperial wizard of the Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan, told The Associated Press by phone from North Carolina that his members were holding a peaceful anti-immigration demonstration and acted in self-defense.

"If we're attacked, we will attack back," said Barker, whose organization lists Pelham, N.C., as its headquarters. Last year, the group drew headlines when it protested the removal of the Confederate flag from the South Carolina Capitol.

Nationwide, the number of active KKK groups increased to 190 in 2015 after falling in 2013 and 2014, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks hate groups.

In January 2015, packets containing fliers from the "Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan" and condemning the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. were left in the driveways of about 40 homes in Santa Ana, about 8 miles south of Anaheim.


“Despite the change in tone from police, community activist Rev. James Stern told the station he is calling on the U.S. and California attorneys general to prosecute the Klan. "We've known for a long history time, everywhere the KKK mobilized, they bring about violence, you don't bring a knife to a peaceful rally," Stern said. …. Stern says the KKK -- or any other organized hate group -- should be indicted under the federal Rico Act, which is designed to combat organized crime and has been used in the past against L.A. street gangs. ….
"If it's not done, it's another form of racist, of justice for one group and not for the other," Stern says. The reverend told CBS Los Angeles he is planning a news conference in Beverly Hills on Monday asking people of all races to come together against the KKK's hate. …. Like many other cities across the United States, Anaheim has a history intertwined with the KKK. What sets the city apart, however, is its decisive backlash after the Klan gained four of five City Council seats in 1924. Those Klansmen were ousted in a recall election after their affiliations with the Klan became public and following a nighttime KKK initiation rally that attracted an estimated 10,000 people to the city park where Saturday's violence erupted. …. The seven people who remained in custody were booked for assault with a deadly weapon or elder abuse for stomping on a Klan member who's older than 65 years old, Wyatt said. Though the Klan members were released, prosecutors will review the case and decide whether to file criminal charges, he said. …. The SUV then sped away, leaving three Klansmen dressed in black shirts decorated with the Klan cross and Confederate flag patches outnumbered."


"If we're attacked, we will attack back," said Barker, whose organization lists Pelham, N.C., as its headquarters. Last year, the group drew headlines when it protested the removal of the Confederate flag from the South Carolina Capitol.” As the Rev. Stern said, “you don’t bring a knife to a peaceful rally.” That is one of the first things I noticed in this article, the knife. I would like to see video of the very beginning, whether the counter-demonstrators actually did “swarm” the SUV and start to attack them as the exited the car as the article says. Rev. Stern’s statement that the RICO Act should be used against the Klan is very true. That kind of thing is what it is for, rather than merely city mobsters or black street gangs. Yes, of course, use it on those groups, but not solely on them. Somehow our authorities can’t always come to the viewpoint that right-leaning white people can be criminals, too. In their case, it’s always “exercising their freedom of speech.”




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ted-cruz-suggests-donald-trumps-tax-returns-show-ties-to-mafia/

Ted Cruz suggests Donald Trump's tax returns show ties to Mafia
By REBECCA SHABAD CBS NEWS
February 29, 2016, 10:02 AM

Play Video -- GOP Is Defaulting On My Loyalty Pledge

Ted Cruz on Sunday suggested that Donald Trump's tax returns might reveal that he has ties to the Mafia.

"There have been multiple media reports about Donald's business dealings with the mob, with the Mafia. Now maybe his tax returns show that those business dealings are a lot more extensive than has been reported," Cruz said on ABC's "This Week."

Cruz said that ABC had reported that Trump had done deals with S&A Concrete, which he said is owned by two of the big crime families in New York. Cruz also suggested Trump's involvement in Atlantic City could have led to connections with the mob.

"Maybe that's what his tax returns show. We don't know," he said.

On NBC's "Meet the Press," Cruz said he would be "thrilled" if Trump released anything.

"The critical point, as Mitt Romney said, the fact that he's scared to release shows that there's a bombshell. Maybe it's the case that Mitt Romney is richer than Donald Trump," Cruz said. "Maybe he has given support to Planned Parenthood. Or maybe it's the case of Donald's' business dealings with the Mafia."

His comments came only two days before Super Tuesday, when 13 states hold primaries or caucuses this week.

Last week, 2012 GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney called on Trump to release his tax returns and said that they likely contain "a bombshell." But at CNN's debate Thursday night last week, Trump said he couldn't release them yet because he's being audited by the IRS.

Trump said Romney "looked like a fool" when he delayed releasing his returns in the last presidential election until he filed them in September 2012, about a month before the election.

"I will absolutely give my returns," Trump said, but added he can't release them because he's currently being audited.

After the debate, Trump suggested to CNN that the IRS is auditing him "maybe because of the fact that I'm a strong Christian."

Cruz, like Marco Rubio, released two-page summaries of the last five years of their tax returns over the weekend.



“Cruz said that ABC had reported that Trump had done deals with S&A Concrete, which he said is owned by two of the big crime families in New York. Cruz also suggested Trump's involvement in Atlantic City could have led to connections with the mob. "Maybe that's what his tax returns show. We don't know," he said. …. After the debate, Trump suggested to CNN that the IRS is auditing him "maybe because of the fact that I'm a strong Christian." Cruz, like Marco Rubio, released two-page summaries of the last five years of their tax returns over the weekend.”


"The critical point, as Mitt Romney said, the fact that he's scared to release shows that there's a bombshell. Maybe it's the case that Mitt Romney is richer than Donald Trump," Cruz said. "Maybe he has given support to Planned Parenthood. Or maybe it's the case of Donald's' business dealings with the Mafia." Maybe it’s an attack by Martians. This story asks interesting questions, but gives no proof of anything. I will keep my eyes open for more stories in the future.




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dnc-vice-chair-rep-tulsi-gabbard-resigns-endorses-bernie-sanders/

DNC vice chair resigns, endorses Bernie Sanders
By REENA FLORES CBS NEWS
February 28, 2016, 10:35 AM

Photograph -- In this Dec. 27, 2014 file photo, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, D-Hawaii speaks in Ahmadabad, India. AP
Play VIDEO -- Is Bernie Sanders in trouble after South Carolina loss?


Democratic National Committee vice chair and Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard is stepping down from her post at the DNC and throwing her weight behind Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign.

"First of all, I am resigning from the DNC so I can support Bernie Sanders for president," Gabbard said early Sunday during NBC's "Meet the Press" panel.

Gabbard, one of the first two female combat veterans to ever serve in Congress, stressed the importance of a leader with a "military mindset," which she described as a candidate who knows "importantly, when we don't use [U.S.] military power."

She pointed to Sanders, a Vermont Independent, as the White House hopeful with that knowledge.

"As a veteran and as a soldier, I've seen first-hand the very high human cost of that war," said Gabbard, who served two tours of duty in the Middle East. "I think it's most important for us, as we look at our choices as to who our next commander-in-chief will be to recognize the necessity to have a commander-in-chief who has foresight, who exercises good judgement."

DNC Chair, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, accepted Gabbard's resignation Sunday.

"Congresswoman Gabbard is a role model who embodies the American ideal that anyone can dream big and make a difference," the Florida congresswoman said in a statement. "She is also a colleague in Congress and a friend, and I look forward to continuing to work alongside her when our Party unites behind whoever emerges as our nominee."

The surprise announcement Sunday is not the first time Gabbard has split with the DNC. In November, the top committee official said that she had been disinvited from the first Democratic presidential primary debate in Nevada, after she had publicly called out for more debates.

Gabbard's endorsement of Sanders comes just a day after Hillary Clinton notched a big victory in South Carolina's primary Saturday night.

But looking to the long term, the Hawaii Democrat emphasized Sanders' electability over the former secretary of state.

"You've seen the groundswell of support that he's gotten -- not only in our or two states but in states across the country -- I think this where there's a hunger for a leader, a commander-in-chief who is honest, who has integrity, who exercises good judgement," Gabbard said.



"Gabbard, one of the first two female combat veterans to ever serve in Congress, stressed the importance of a leader with a "military mindset," which she described as a candidate who knows "importantly, when we don't use [U.S.] military power." She pointed to Sanders, a Vermont Independent, as the White House hopeful with that knowledge. …. DNC Chair, Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, accepted Gabbard's resignation Sunday. "Congresswoman Gabbard is a role model who embodies the American ideal that anyone can dream big and make a difference," the Florida congresswoman said in a statement. "She is also a colleague in Congress and a friend, and I look forward to continuing to work alongside her when our Party unites behind whoever emerges as our nominee." …. "You've seen the groundswell of support that he's gotten -- not only in our or two states but in states across the country -- I think this where there's a hunger for a leader, a commander-in-chief who is honest, who has integrity, who exercises good judgement," Gabbard said.”


“In November, the top committee official said that she had been disinvited from the first Democratic presidential primary debate in Nevada, after she had publicly called out for more debates.” So you can’t have a disagreement with the DNC over what looks to be a noncontroversial matter without being “disinvited?” Maybe she spoke heatedly about it. Whatever, it makes me feel more comfortable about giving all my meager donations directly to Bernie Sanders. I am beginning to be more concerned about the present day makeup and leanings of the party, as I have about Clinton herself. It’s too much like a return to the old “smoke filled rooms” of my younger years. There are also rumors that many Democrats have actually taken money from right-leaning Big Business, even the dreaded Koch Brothers. Clinton’s voting record doesn’t make me feel good about her either. I hate to see the Party be absolutely split, but I think there is a definite fracture of philosophy already. I hope for the desired unity which Wasserman mentions will indeed come about. The Dems, when we vote in full force, are probably stronger than the Republicans, but if our various groups – ethnic, social and political – don’t pull together we won’t win elections.



http://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-high-school-fight-club-went-on-for-over-decade/

Students: Real-life high school "Fight Club" lasted a decade
CBS NEWS
February 29, 2016, 7:04 AM

Related: Virginia daycare teacher convicted in "baby fight club"


California school officials are investigating an alleged "fight club" on a high school campus after several videos of students punching each other surfaced last week, prompting complaints from parents.

The students are from Nevada Union High School, about an hour north of Sacramento. The district superintendent said she only learned about the fight club recently, but the fights may have been going on for years, reports CBS News correspondent Carter Evans.

The videos show students pummeling each other, wearing boxing gloves but no protective gear.

The fights apparently took place during school hours in a dilapidated clubhouse used by the baseball team as other students looked on.

"We immediately opened an investigation. We've shut down the location where the fight had taken place," said Superintendent Louise Johnson.

Current and former students told CBS station KOVR the fights have been held for more than a decade, with kids getting knocked out, receiving bloody noses and black eyes and even going home with concussions.

"Parents have been aware, coaches have been aware, you know, prior to it being brought to our attention," said Nevada Union High School Principal Dan Frisella.

Senior James Herlitz is friends with some of the students in the videos and he insists they had no malicious intent.

"No one was trying to like, 'Oh I am going to beat this kid up,'" Herlitz said. "Just some guys having fun, laughing, playing music and boxing."

At least three videos were reportedly posted online last week, but have since been deleted. The teenage fighting club ring has drawn comparisons to the movie, "Fight Club," about a recreational fighting league for adult men.

"It really blew my mind. I was surprised kids could get away with things like that," said a parent.

The high school is trying to determine which students were involved. The district said it is investigating whether any school personnel should also be disciplined.


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/virginia-day-care-worker-convicted-baby-fight-club-article-1.2497416

Virginia day care worker convicted for torturing toddlers in 'baby fight club'
BY ALFRED NG
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Thursday, January 14, 2016, 5:25 PM

The first rule of baby fight club is — don’t ever have a baby fight club.

A judge found a former Virginia day care worker guilty of more than a dozen abuse charges, including child cruelty, after she started a “baby fight club” with the toddlers in her class.

In a horrifying case of abuse, Sarah Jordan was convicted for traumatizing her Minnieland Academy class, full of 16-month to 2-year-old toddlers, and faces 41 years in prison.

The Tyler Durden-wannabe’s little tykes fight club was busted after a Sept. 2013 report by the Virginia Department of Social Services accused her of abusing children for at least six months.

The investigation showed Jordan, 31, and fellow teacher Kierra Spriggs would encourage brawls between babies while roughing up some children herself.

One witness reported seeing the day care staff’s cruel antics: stomping on toddler’s toes when the babies weren’t wearing shoes, and laughing.

During the summer, the report said the twisted teachers targeted toddlers who were afraid of water and dunked them into a portable pool, cackling as the terrified children cried.

They would also blast kids in the face with a powerful hose and dump buckets of water on their heads.

Instead of helping toddlers change their dirty diapers, the staff would tell them to “get away and that they stink,” the report stated.

Jordan was also accused of feeding children “Flaming Hot Cheetos” and laughing as they reeled from the intense spiciness.

During her trial, she denied all of these accusations, but admitted to light water-play with the kids.

“I used it to get the children wet, like a sprinkler,” she said.

Jordan’s cruel antics traumatized the toddlers, parents testified at the trial.

Parents said the kids turned violent at home, mimicking the monster teacher and stomping on their parents toes, NBC Washington reported.

"She would stomp her mom's feet. She would run in and slap us for no apparent reason and start giggling," Adam Smith testified.

Some became terrified of water and refused to take baths. Most toddlers cried when they had to go to the center.

Jordan's sentencing will be on May 6.

ang@nydailynews.com



BABY -- “The investigation showed Jordan, 31, and fellow teacher Kierra Spriggs would encourage brawls between babies while roughing up some children herself. One witness reported seeing the day care staff’s cruel antics: stomping on toddler’s toes when the babies weren’t wearing shoes, and laughing. …. Parents said the kids turned violent at home, mimicking the monster teacher and stomping on their parents toes, NBC Washington reported. "She would stomp her mom's feet. She would run in and slap us for no apparent reason and start giggling," Adam Smith testified. …. During her trial, she denied all of these accusations, but admitted to light water-play with the kids.”


HIGH SCHOOL -- “Current and former students told CBS station KOVR the fights have been held for more than a decade, with kids getting knocked out, receiving bloody noses and black eyes and even going home with concussions. "Parents have been aware, coaches have been aware, you know, prior to it being brought to our attention," said Nevada Union High School Principal Dan Frisella. …. The students are from Nevada Union High School, about an hour north of Sacramento. The district superintendent said she only learned about the fight club recently, but the fights may have been going on for years, reports CBS News correspondent Carter Evans. The videos show students pummeling each other, wearing boxing gloves but no protective gear.”


If there was any question in my mind of the result of physical aggressiveness (or mental) toward children, this removes all doubt. It makes them vicious rather than obedient. Some parents think they have to frighten their children into good behavior, but in fact a gentle approach is not only more effective, it is far less emotionally and mentally damaging. The teenagers in this case were – unless later news articles tell differently – apparently doing these things on their own, though some parents and “coaches” are believed to have been aware of the fight groups before Principal Frisella and apparently at least one other unnamed other official, were made aware of it. I do hope that at least is true, though I can’t imagine coaches condoning it either. Some vague idea of “toughening boys up” is sometimes expressed by grown men, but it is simply indecent in my opinion.

Even if a boy does seem like “a sissy,” working with him one to one in order to increase his self-confidence would work much better, and without teaching something that is specifically evil. I believe a very timid child should be treated by a child psychologist with talk therapy or groups; and if he is the victim of bullies, he can be given martial arts training which would probably help him defend himself. He should also be taught how to VERBALLY resist such assault.

In addition, the bullies should be effectively corrected and probably sent into therapy. I have heard that the reasons why bigger or more aggressive kids bully others is also due to mental or emotional problems. Sometimes they are bullied or abused at home.

One major problem with our schools is that they are full to a point of overcrowding in most conditions and adult supervisors are simply unable to keep track in many cases of who the aggressor is. This inhibits effective learning, because kids are literally not safe at school anymore. Sad stuff!

The Baby Fight Club above is even more shocking, because we assume that intelligent and sane adults wouldn’t even consider doing such a thing. Of course, the photo of that woman looked like she was either drugged or unintelligent. The population in this country is getting too big, especially in large cities, for parents to form a really effective opinion of where and how their kids are being cared for while they are away at work. Some of the “academies” are not good businesses of any kind, and their child care workers are by no mean well selected. They should have some kind of child psychology and teaching training mandated at least on the state levels, and possibly on the national level before they can be hired, and strong supervision. In both these cases, there seems to have been no one in charge.



http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/first-read-republican-party-brink-coming-apart-n527901

MEET THE PRESS
First Read: A Republican Party on the Brink of Coming Apart
by CHUCK TODD, MARK MURRAY and CARRIE DANN
FEB 29 2016, 1:48 PM ET

Play video -- Donald Trump criticized for not disavowing KKK's David Duke 3:12
Photograph -- Image: Today in Pictures Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., pauses as he speaks during a campaign rally at Baldwin Wallace University in Berea, Ohio. Jacquelyn Martin / AP


A Republican Party on the brink of coming apart

In the last 72 hours, the Republican presidential contest no longer resembles that final scene in Reservoir Dogs we wrote about a month ago. Instead, it has become Mad Max: Fury Road — chaotic, brutal, disturbing, and still mesmerizing. (Discuss amongst yourselves who in the GOP field is Immortan Joe, Imperator Furioisa, or the dude playing the fire-spewing guitar.) Just consider the rhetoric on the campaign trail and on the Sunday morning shows

Donald Trump on Marco Rubio: "I go back and I see him with makeup. And it's like he's putting it on with a trowel."
Rubio on Trump: "The guy with the worst spray tan in America is attacking me for putting on makeup. Donald Trump likes to sue people. He should sue whoever did that to his face."

Trump on Rubio: "He has really large ears, the biggest ears I've ever seen." Rubio on Trump: "And you know what they say about guys with small hands." Ted Cruz on Trump: "Multiple news reports have reported about his dealings with, for example, S&A Construction, which was owned by "Fat Tony" Salerno, who is a mobster who is in jail. It is owned by two of the major New York crime families."

Throw in the Mussolini retweets, David Duke, and the Republican operatives and politicians (including Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse from last night) who say they will NEVER support Trump if he's the nominee. This is more than a mess for the Republican Party; it is the GOP potentially coming apart before our very eyes -- no matter who ultimately becomes the party's nominee or how long it takes. As our friend Amy Walter observes, "That rumbling sound you hear is the GOP breaking apart. It's been divided for years, but Trump is catalyst for its 'creative destruction '"

In damage control, Trump blames faulty earpiece for KKK answer

In an interview on "Today" this morning, Trump was asked why he didn't disavow David Duke and the KKK in an interview yesterday. "The question was about David Duke and various groups," Trump said, explaining that he had previously disavowed Duke. When he was pressed that the question was about Duke and the KKK, Trump said he misheard the question. "[I had] "a very bad earpiece, and you could hardly hear what [CNN's Jake Tapper] was saying." More Trump: "I have no problem with disavowing groups, but I'd like to know who they are."

. . . .”



“Just consider the rhetoric on the campaign trail and on the Sunday morning shows. Donald Trump on Marco Rubio: "I go back and I see him with makeup. And it's like he's putting it on with a trowel." Rubio on Trump: "The guy with the worst spray tan in America is attacking me for putting on makeup. Donald Trump likes to sue people. He should sue whoever did that to his face."


I certainly feel that the Republican Party needs to purge itself of the Tea Party Far Right and keep the more sensible people in, but it seems they are fighting instead against the seemingly rabid attacks of Donald Trump; and that is perhaps because his dangerous popularity among the blue collar whites, whom they have all been courting for years by trying to out-bigot each other, has mushroomed beyond the realm of being merely challenging and is verging into that of the frightening.

It looks as though “Little Marco Rubio” is quite capable of defending himself against Trumps slights and insults by going at him verbal blow for blow. Rubio said two things that are crude to the nth degree, not that Trump’s comments haven’t been as bad or worse throughout this whole campaign, but Rubio is much more clever and funny about it, for instance “He should sue whoever did that to his face."

I do enjoy seeing someone mercilessly insult Trump as he does others. Most importantly, all the three anti-Trump contenders have vowed that they will never support Trump as the Republican Party candidate. I hope that doesn’t mean that they will throw the towel in at the end of Trump actually does get the nomination. They need to boycott the party and encourage their followers to do the same.



http://abcnews.go.com/US/justice-clarence-thomas-breaks-decade-long-silence-bench/story?id=37285926

Justice Clarence Thomas Breaks His Decade-Long Silence on the Bench
By AUDREY TAYLOR
Feb 29, 2016, 12:41 PM ET

Related: Obstacles Along the Road From Nominee to Supreme Court Justice
How Antonin Scalia's Death Will Affect the Supreme Court


Justice Clarence Thomas broke his silence today after ten years of not asking a question on the bench.

Thomas last spoke from the bench on Feb. 22, 2006. Today, he asked nearly a dozen questions during oral arguments in the case of Voisine v. United States, which examines whether convictions for reckless misdemeanor domestic violence assault can prevent firearm ownership.

Thomas asked one of the lawyers to provide an example of when a constitutional right can be taken away for a misdemeanor violation.

“Can you give me...this is a misdemeanor violation. It suspends a constitutional right. Can you give me another area where a misdemeanor violation suspends a constitutional right?” Thomas asked. "You're saying that recklessness is sufficient to trigger a violation -- misdemeanor violation of domestic conduct that results in a lifetime ban on possession of a gun."

He continued: "Well, let's say that a publisher is reckless about the use of children, and what could be considered indecent displace and that triggers a violation of, say, a hypothetical law against the use of children in these ads, and let's say it's a misdemeanor violation. Could you suspend that publisher's right to ever publish again?”

Assistant to the Solicitor General Ilana Eisenstein responded, "I don’t think you could suspend the right to ever publish” to which Thomas followed by asking, “So how is that different from suspending your Second Amendment right?

This is the second time in a week the public has heard from Thomas. Last Thursday, Thomas was asked questions by TMZ after a luncheon.



This almost seems like a change in his personality, perhaps brought on by having a good psychotherapist, because to say nothing for ten years is not healthy. I had no idea that he had been mute, and I must wonder why. Being a conservative, it’s not surprising that he would be interested in the gun issue, but the more basic question of how one of our guaranteed rights -- such as the right to vote due to having a felony on ones’ record, for instance -- can be abridged for a whole lifetime over a misdemeanor really does sound to me like and important question. The fewer situations in which our basic rights can be taken away, the better. For a capital crime, that makes more sense, but even in those cases prisoners don’t lose the right to appeal or be treated humanely in prison, even at the point of execution.

To me, it shouldn’t be true of a felony either. Prisoners should, in my view, get their basic civil rights back after they have served their time, and without a formal procedure like having to make a written plea to a court or state office either. I’m especially thinking of the fact that so many black people lose their right to vote when they go to prison for relatively minor crimes, which can be beefed up to constitute a felony by a combination of circumstances.



http://www.becketfund.org/sikh-army-captain-fights-pentagon-to-practice-faith/?utm_content=buffer2471d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Sikh Army Captain fights Pentagon to practice faith
Bronze Star recipient asks court to protect turban and beard
For Immediate Release: February 29, 2016
Media Contact: Melinda Skea, media@becketfund.org, 202-349-7224


WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Army Captain Simratpal Singh filed a lawsuit earlier today asking a federal court to protect his right to wear his Sikh turban and beard while serving in the Army. Captain Singh initially received a temporary accommodation in mid-December, allowing him to report to his new assignment in Fort Belvoir, Virginia with beard and turban intact. But now the Army is imposing new hurdles, signaling it will refuse to make the accommodation permanent, thereby forcing him to seek the court’s protection.

A Bronze Star recipient and West Point graduate, Captain Singh faces being forced to compromise his faith despite the fact that the military already accommodates nearly 50,000 soldiers with beards for medical or other reasons (NYT article.) The accommodation was only the fourth time the military has granted such an accommodation since imposing a ban in the 1980s.

“Captain Singh is a decorated war hero. The Army should be trying to get more soldiers like him, not banning them from serving or punishing them for their beliefs,” said Eric Baxter, Senior Counsel at the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which represents Captain Singh. “It’s time for the Pentagon to stop playing games and start doing the right thing – for Captain Singh, for Sikh Americans, and for all Americans.”

Captain Singh, a devout Sikh with a family history of military service, graduated West Point with honors and then served in Afghanistan, where he was awarded the Bronze Star for his work clearing IEDs. During his time in the Army, Captain Singh has completed Ranger School and his Master’s degree. After nine years of being forced to choose between his faith and his country, the Army granted him two back-to-back temporary religious accommodations that protect him into March 2016. However, just before next month’s deadline, and after Captain Singh passed standard protective-mask testing, the Army demanded he undergo a series of additional tests that other soldiers permitted to wear beards for medical reasons are not required to complete. This discriminatory testing could threaten Captain Singh’s ability to continue serving his country with a permanent accommodation.

“I am proud to fight for my country, which includes fighting to protect others’ religious beliefs,” said Captain Simratpal Singh in December after receiving his temporary accommodation. “I simply ask that I be able to continue serving without being forced to give up a core part of my own faith—of who I am.”

Observant Sikhs have served in the U.S. military—including in combat zones and in Special Forces—from at least World War I through the Vietnam War. The Army has granted nearly 50,000 permanent exemptions to its beard ban for medical reasons. And just this summer, a D.C. federal court held that the Army violated federal law and its own regulations by barring a Sikh from applying to join the military because of his turban and beard.

“This ban is wrong. Sikh Americans have proven time and again that they can serve with honor and excellence,” said Harsimran Kaur, Legal Director for the Sikh Coalition, which serves as co-counsel for Captain Singh. “Our military’s work is too hard and too important to be weighed down by unnecessary limitations on who can do the job.”

“For years we have worked to avoid litigation under the guiding belief that the U.S. military would finally do the right thing,” said co-counsel Amandeep Sidhu, McDermott Will & Emery LLP. “The U.S. Constitution and RFRA make it clear that Captain Singh has the right to practice his faith in the military and we are confident that the court will agree.”

On February 29, the Becket Fund and the Sikh Coalition, along with co-counsel at McDermott Will & Emery, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, asking the court to permanently protect Captain Singh’s religious freedom and allow him to keep his beard and turban while serving in the military.

For more information or to arrange an interview with a Becket Fund attorney, please contact Melinda Skea at media@becketfund.org or 202-349-7224. Interviews can be arranged in English, Chinese, French, German, Portuguese, Russian, and Spanish.

Additional Information:

Complaint (February 29, 2016)
Second temporary religious accommodation (Jan. 8, 2016)
First Temporary Religious Accommodation (Dec. 9, 2015)
Request for Religious Accommodation (Oct. 21, 2015)
Singh v. Carter Media Kit (Images, press releases, legal docs, news)
###

The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty is a non-profit, public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religious traditions and has a 100% win-rate before the United States Supreme Court. For over 20 years, it has successfully defended clients of all faiths, including Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Muslims, Native Americans, Sikhs, and Zoroastrians (read more).



“U.S. Army Captain Simratpal Singh filed a lawsuit earlier today asking a federal court to protect his right to wear his Sikh turban and beard while serving in the Army. Captain Singh initially received a temporary accommodation in mid-December, allowing him to report to his new assignment in Fort Belvoir, Virginia with beard and turban intact. But now the Army is imposing new hurdles, signaling it will refuse to make the accommodation permanent, thereby forcing him to seek the court’s protection. …. ‘This ban is wrong. Sikh Americans have proven time and again that they can serve with honor and excellence,’ said Harsimran Kaur, Legal Director for the Sikh Coalition, which serves as co-counsel for Captain Singh. “Our military’s work is too hard and too important to be weighed down by unnecessary limitations on who can do the job.” … On February 29, the Becket Fund and the Sikh Coalition, along with co-counsel at McDermott Will & Emery, filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, asking the court to permanently protect Captain Singh’s religious freedom and allow him to keep his beard and turban while serving in the military.”


From this article it seems as though Singh only recently applied to serve in his beard and turban after 9 years of following the military rules. First they gave him a temporary permission, but now are reneging. There is no reason given. The army’s own precedent of granting permits to 50,000 other Sikhs and others on the matter of beards (the article doesn’t mention the turban as a subject of prohibition) and the DC Federal Court’s position against the Army on this have not produced an exemption for him. In addition, he has a long record of good service with medals, so one would think they would want to keep him enough to honor his religious freedom. The Becket Foundation and Singh have filed a complaint with the DC Court to win a guarantee of his rights of religious freedom.

There may be some in the legislature or the military who distrust the look of a beard and turban on grounds of its’ similarity to that of a practicing Muslim, which is a group that is increasingly under fire across the country and Europe as well. Sikhs are not religious or political radicals, however, but just the opposite.

See the Wikipedia article below. Excerpts: “The development of Sikhism was influenced by the Bhakti Movement.[21][22][23] Sikhism developed while the region was being ruled by the Mughal Empire (in the year 1469). Two of the Sikh gurus – Guru Arjan and Guru Tegh Bahadur, after they refused to convert to Islam, were tortured and executed by the Mughal rulers.[24][25] The Islamic era persecution of Sikhs triggered the founding of the Khalsa as a movement for freedom of religion.[24][26] A Sikh is expected to embody the qualities of a "Sant-Sipāhī" – a saint-soldier.[27][28]”

“The fundamental beliefs of Sikhism, articulated in the sacred scripture Guru Granth Sahib, include faith and meditation on the name of the one creator, unity and equality of all humankind, engaging in selfless service, striving for social justice for the benefit and prosperity of all, and honest conduct and livelihood while living a householder's life.[6][7][8] With over 25 million adherents worldwide, Sikhism is the fifth-largest religion in the world.[9]”

Rather than being a part of Islam, Sikhism is a reaction of some North Indians against the rule of Islam, in which two Sikh leaders were put to death for refusing to convert. Unlike a few groups of Islam, Sikhs try to sow peace rather than war. They should be allowed to wear their turban and beard as it is harmless in their case.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sikhism

Sikhism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sikhism (/ˈsɪkᵻzəm/; Sikkhī, Punjabi pronunciation: [ˈsɪkːʰiː]), or Sikhi[3] (from Sikh, meaning a disciple, or a learner), one of the youngest amongst the major world religions, is a monotheistic religion that originated in the Punjab region of South Asia (subcontinental India) during the 15th century.[4][5] The fundamental beliefs of Sikhism, articulated in the sacred scripture Guru Granth Sahib, include faith and meditation on the name of the one creator, unity and equality of all humankind, engaging in selfless service, striving for social justice for the benefit and prosperity of all, and honest conduct and livelihood while living a householder's life.[6][7][8] With over 25 million adherents worldwide, Sikhism is the fifth-largest religion in the world.[9]

Sikhism originated with the birth of Guru Nanak in 1469, and the ten Sikh Gurus established and advanced the religion over the centuries. In Sikh religious philosophy, the word Guru also refers to God, and God and Guru are often synonymous in Gurbani (the sacred writings of the Sikh Gurus).[10][11] Guru Nanak considered God as his Guru, he projected himself as God's mouthpiece and servant, but maintained that he was a teacher, was not a reincarnation of God or in any way related to God.[12][13] In 1708, before his death, Guru Gobind Singh, the last Guru in human form, decreed that the holy scripture, Guru Granth Sahib, would be the final and perpetual Guru of the Sikhs.[14]

Sikhism emphasizes Simran (meditation on the words of the Guru Granth Sahib), that can be expressed musically through Kirtan or internally through Nam Japna, as a means to feel God's presence, and to have control over the "Five Thieves" (lust, rage, greed, attachment and conceit).[15] Hand in hand, secular life is considered to be intertwined with the spiritual life.[16] Guru Nanak taught that living an "active, creative, and practical life" of "truthfulness, fidelity, self-control and purity" is above the metaphysical truth, and that the ideal man is one who "establishes union with God, knows His Will, and carries out that Will".[17] He also established the system of the Langar, or communal kitchen, in order to demonstrate the need to share and have equality between all people.[18] Guru Hargobind, the sixth Sikh Guru, established the political/temporal (Miri) and spiritual (Piri) realms to be mutually coexistent.[19] The Sikhs also reject claims that any particular religious tradition has a monopoly on Absolute Truth.[20]

The development of Sikhism was influenced by the Bhakti movement.[21][22][23] Sikhism developed while the region was being ruled by the Mughal Empire. Two of the Sikh gurus – Guru Arjan and Guru Tegh Bahadur, after they refused to convert to Islam, were tortured and executed by the Mughal rulers.[24][25] The Islamic era persecution of Sikhs triggered the founding of the Khalsa as a movement for freedom of religion.[24][26] A Sikh is expected to embody the qualities of a "Sant-Sipāhī" – a saint-soldier.[27][28]

Sikhi and Sikhism[edit]

Sikhi is a monistic religion founded by Guru Nanak during the 15th century holding that there is one supreme entity holding control of the entire universe. This singular entity is then divided into two categories the Nirgun, invisible and the Sargun, the visible and capable of attributes. This one entity is referred to as Ik Onkar.

Adherents of Sikhi are known as Sikhs (students or disciples), the Khalsa. According to Devinder Singh Chahal, "The word 'Sikhi' (also known as Gurmat) gave rise to the modern anglicized word 'Sikhism' for the modern world.".[29]



http://vspages.com/monism-vs-dualism-4430/

Monism vs. Dualism

Difference Between Monism and Dualism

Monism and dualism are philosophical concepts. These words explain themselves. Mono means one and monism advocates the oneness of soul while dualism advocates the existence of individual soul and the supreme soul.

According to Monism everything in this universe is unified into one and there is no diversification in the universe while dualism does not believe in this concept.

Monism finds its roots in Indian Philosophy. According to this philosophy Brahman is comprised of space and matter and is the supreme entity in this universe. Time, energy, existence of everything on this universe is believed to have its core in the Supreme Brahman.