Talking with JinC regulars – 6 -1- 06

(One of a series of posts in the original web log tradition: notes and "thinking out loud." These posts will be most easily understood by regular visitors and are written with them especially in mind. But others are welcome.)

Folks,

In a few minutes I’m going to post on New York Times’ columnist David Brooks May 28 column, The Duke Witch Hunt.

The title lets you know where Brooks is going. What it doesn’t tell you is that in his Apr. 9 column Brooks said some pretty rough things about the Duke lacrosse players, which he now has the grace and decency to acknowledge and correct.

Mentioning the post here gives me another chance to say how good I feel that just about every commenter here held on to sound judgment, respected due process and avoided the trashing of the players.

There weren’t all that many people behaving that way back in late-March and early-April. And there are still plenty now who aren’t acting that way.

Folks, in a tough time you stood out as intelligent, articulate and fair.

I won’t return again to this matter as regards you, but I won’t forget either. You’re a fine group.

I plan to stay with the poster part of the Duke lacrosse story. We’re all going to learn a lot by sticking with that story. These posts started it at JinC.

Duke lacrosse: What about the posters? (May 29)

Duke lacrosse: Crimetoppers poster questions. (May 30)

By way of follow up to those posts I’ve made contact with attorney Alex Charns. He was helpful and shared the material he’s sent to Durham City Manager Patrick Baker.

The posts also let you know I’ve been calling Durham CrimeStoppers and Cpl. Addison.

I called them again this morning. Left VMs. No call backs so far.

Are you surprised?

Yesterday I called Baker’s office asking to see copies of the CrimeStoppers posters.

I was passed on to an assistant’s VM. Left a message yesterday and again today. No call backs.

If I have to, I’ll make a trip down to City Hall early next week.

The two most recent posts concerning N&O coverage of the DLC are very important. I plan to post further on the N&O stories discussed in them. In case you haven’t read them they are:

There are new Duke lacrosse discrepancies. (May 27)

and

Duke lacrosse: Taking terrible and making it worse (May 31)

The N&O’s March 25 story is perhaps the most important story a newspaper has published so far on the DLC. It appeared just a day after the story broke. It presented the accuser as a very sympathetic victim while telling readers nothing about the cooperative actions of Duke lacrosse players.

The N&O’s story set the bias and inflamed the passions that much of the national media quickly picked up on.

But it started with The N&O.

I’ll post further on that story in a day or so.

BTW – Folks, I’ll bet you all noticed that Cpl. Addison of Durham CrimeStoppers is also quoted in The N&O’s March 25 story as a saying a “crime” was committed in the house

As promised I’ve sent Ted Vaden this post, Duke lacrosse: I'll try McClatchy's public editor again, which links to the other two N&O posts. Let’s see what we hear back.


Sunday Ed Driscoll gave me a nice link on this post: N. Y. Times dissembles in Kerry story. Big JinC traffic jump.

Yes, there is a world beyond the DLC and I'll try to get to it more often in the next few weeks. But the DLC matters are important and not enough media are paying attention to them.

I didn't spell check this or proof carefully. Time's pressing.

John

Duke lacrosse: I'll try McClatchy's public editor again

If you're a regular you know Ted Vaden, public editor of the McClatchy Company's Raleigh News & Observer, has failed to respond to a few recent emails.

The emails asked Vaden specific, fact-based questions about The N&O's coverage of the Duke lacrosse case; coverage many readers, including me, say is biased against the lacrosse players and has inflamed race and class relations in the community.

Why no response from Vaden?

I'm told he's been away lately.

What's more, there was the Memorial Day weekend; and perhaps as Vaden's told me before: "I guess I just lost your emails, John."

OK, but I won't give up.

I'm sending Vaden via email two new JinC posts. Both contain important, fact-based questions concerning The N&O's Duke lacrosse coverage.

The first post is "There are new Duke lacrosse discrepancies."

In that post I report and question two N&O news stories. Both new stories contain accounts of the accuser’s whereabouts and activities in the hours immediately preceding her arrival at the party where she says she was gang-raped. One account is by the accuser's father; the other by a man The N&O says drove her to the house.

But the two accounts contradict each other. The father and the man The N&O says drove her to the party put the accuser in different places doing different things in the same few hours just before the party.

The accuser's father's account is contained in a May 19 N&O story; the driver's account is contained in a May 27 N&O story.

If you compare the two stories, you'll quickly see the conflicts between the father and driver's accounts are HUGE.

The N&O made no effort in its May 27 story to reconcile or explain the conflicts.

In fact, The N&O didn't tell readers anything in its May 27 story about the conflicts.

Since May 27 through today, June 1, The N&O has told readers nothing about the conflicts.

If you're an N&O reader you may be asking: How can The N&O ignore such conflicts after sending reporters into courthouses looking for any misdemeanor charge against anyone whose name appeared on a Duke Men's lacrosse roster as far back as 1999; and then published its findings in a front page story in a Sunday edition?

Great question!

The second post is "Duke lacrosse: Taking terrible and making it worse."

On March 24 The N&O broke the Duke lacrosse story, telling readers 46 lacrosse players had submitted to DNA testing following an allegation of gang-rape.

The following day The N&O granted the accuser an anonymous interview which it ran on page one beneath a five column headline spread.

The N&O's March 25 story headline:

DANCER GIVES DETAILS OF ORDEAL

The N&O's sub-headline:

A woman hired to dance for the Duke lacrosse team describes a night of racial slurs, growing fear and, finally, sexual violence.

The N&O's story was consistent with it's unqualified headlines.

In just the story's first five paragraphs The N&O presented the accuser as a frightened, tearful victim who heard the "barking of racial slurs" before the brutal crime.

N&O readers were told:

"authorities vowed to crack the team's wall of solidarity.

"We're asking someone from the lacrosse team to step forward," Durham police Cpl. David Addison said. "We will be relentless in finding out who committed this crime."

Understandably, many N&O readers adopted a "slam those guys in jail" mentality.

But in its March 25 story The N&O didn't tell readers three Duke lacrosse players who rented the house where the alleged crime took place had all voluntarily given statements to the police and had offered to take lie detector tests; or that the lacrosse players were by March 25 acting on advice of counsel who had been seeking to meet with DA Nifong and the police.

The police knew long before March 25 of the player's cooperative actions. Did the police not tell The N&O about them?

What did The N&O ask the police about actions by the lacrosse players?

Did The N&O know by March 25 of the cooperative actions of the lacrosse players?

If The N&O did know, why didn't it tell its readers about the player's actions?

Readers who've seen our community torn to the point leaders were forced to take newspaper ads calling for public calm deserve answers to those questions.

I hope Vaden answers the questions in both posts.

Keep checking back. I'm not giving up. And I'll keep you informed.


Readers note:

Below a copy of an email I sent Anne Blythe, the reporter who wrote the May 27 story. I've heard nothing from her.
______________________________________________
To Reporter Anne Blythe

Raleigh News & Observer

Per your bylined story today: "Accuser seemed OK early on, driver says"

The post linked below contains questions which your story did not address but which intelligent readers will naturally ask. I'll be happy to post at my blog the answers you provide.

"There are new Duke lacrosse discrepancies."

Also, you story tells readers: "He [Mr. Taylor] did not say whether they consumed any alcohol."

But you don't tell readers whether you actually asked Taylor whether he, she or they consumed alcohol while they were together,

Did you ask Taylor any questions about alcohol consumption involving him, her, or both?

If yes, what did he say?

If no, why not?

You can understand why readers would have an interest in such questions.

I'll post in full at www.johnincarolina.com your response.

Thank you for your attention to this email and the post linked.

John
www.johnincarolina.com
_____________________________________________
Post URLs:

http://www.newsobserver.com/122/story/441262.html

http://www.newsobserver.com/1185/story/443932.html

http://www.newsobserver.com/102/v-print/story/421799.html

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2006/05/there-are-new-duke-lacrosse.html

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2006/05/duke-lacrosse-taking-terrible-and.html

The Churchill Series - May 31, 2006

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Historian Douglas S. Russell tells us how Winston Churchill, a student at Harrow, became Lieutenant Churchill, 4th Queen’s Own Hussers.

Churchill entered Sandhurst on September 1st, 1893 at the age of eighteen years, ten months. He stood 5’ 6" tall.

The Royal Military is located at Camberley, southwest of London. Founded in 1741, it served the purpose of training officers for the infantry and cavalry. Sometimes referred to as Britain’s West Point, it was not in fact a four-year college, and granted no degree.

Churchill took the standard course: three terms of instruction and training over an eighteen-month period. The old school is still there today, looking just as it did in the 1890s.

The subjects were few and practical: tactics, fortification, topography (map making), military law and military administration. He also trained in drill, marksmanship, riding, gymnastics, and fencing. Sandhurst uniforms were those of the regular army, including the red dress coat and the dress blue spike helmet.

Churchill did well at Sandhurst, graduating twentieth out of a class of 130 in December 1894. As he later wrote, "It shows that I could learn quickly the things that matter."

For the first time in his life his personal interests and his work were the same and he excelled. A distinguished career had begun.

_______________________________________________________
Douglass S. Russell, Lt. Churchill,4th Queen’s Own Hussars. The Churchill Centre.

Greenpeace didn't think it was funny. What about you?

At The Volokh Conspiracy Jonathan Adler points to an amusing item concerning the very serious environmental group, Greenpeace.

From the Philadelphia Inquirer:

Before President Bush touched down in Pennsylvania Wednesday to promote his nuclear energy policy, the environmental group Greenpeace was mobilizing.

"This volatile and dangerous source of energy" is no answer to the country's energy needs, shouted a Greenpeace fact sheet decrying the "threat" posed by the Limerick reactors Bush visited.

But a factoid or two later, the Greenpeace authors were stumped while searching for the ideal menacing metaphor.

We present it here exactly as it was written, capital letters and all:

"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]."

Had Greenpeace been hacked by a nuke-loving Bush fan? Or was this proof of Greenpeace fear-mongering?

The aghast Greenpeace spokesman who issued the memo, Steve Smith, said a colleague was making a joke by inserting the language in a draft that was then mistakenly released.

"Given the seriousness of the issue at hand, I don't even think it's funny," Smith said.

I’m sure you don’t, Mr. Smith.

And I guess I shouldn’t be laughing and passing the story on to JinC readers.

Anyway, Mr. Smith, did you hear the one about the actress and the bishop who met at a Greenpeace rally?

He asks if she really knows what it would be like if they experienced a meltdown.

She says, “Well, first we'll have to find a more private place, don't you think?”

Hat Tip: Mike Williams

Duke lacrosse: Taking terrible and making it worse

On March 24 the Raleigh News & Observer broke the story we’ve come to call the Duke lacrosse case.

The following day The N&O’s front page carried a five-column, above the fold headline

DANCER GIVES DETAILS OF ORDEAL

The subheadline

A woman hired to dance for the Duke lacrosse team describes a night of racial slurs, growing fear and, finally, sexual violence.

The story began:

The woman who says she was raped last week by three members of the Duke University lacrosse team thought she would be dancing for five men at a bachelor party, she said Friday. But when she arrived that night, she found herself surrounded by more than 40.

Just moments after she and another exotic dancer started to perform, she said, men in the house started barking racial slurs. The two women, both black, stopped dancing.

"We started to cry," she said. "We were so scared."

Forty-six members of the men's lacrosse team submitted DNA samples Thursday in the unusual case. As of late Friday, there had been no arrests. Duke officials briefed university staff Friday on the allegations, and authorities vowed to crack the team's wall of solidarity.

"We're asking someone from the lacrosse team to step forward," Durham police Cpl. David Addison said. "We will be relentless in finding out who committed this crime." […]

Looking back now you may wonder why The N&O’s headlines provided no qualifications of any sort regarding what the dancer said happened that night?

Why did The N&O just headline that the woman had described a night of racial slurs, growing fear and, finally, sexual violence in the same way a paper might headline a new publisher’s plans for the paper?

But many decent people, prepped by the headlines, very likely put those questions aside as they felt great sympathy reading how the women, exposed to the "barking of racial slurs," “started to cry” and “were so scared.”

And once they learned police Cpl. David Addison had vowed, “We will be relentless in finding out who committed this crime,” they reacted as most decent citizens do.

They wanted to help the officer put those criminals behind bars, damn it!

That’s how, I believe, a lot of otherwise decent people began to adopt a “vigilante mentality” they now regret.

But what if somewhere in The N&O's first five paragraphs it told readers the three Duke lacrosse players who rented the house where the party was held had all voluntarily given statements to the police and had offered to take lie detector tests?

What if along with "authorities vowed to crack the team's wall of solidarity" The N&O had said something about players acting on advice of counsel who were seeking to meet with the DA and provide him information?

If people knew some of that it would have made a big difference in how people began to think about the story.

In fact it would have made a difference if The N&O had told readers any of those facts anywhere in its more than one thousand word March 25 story.

The police and District Attorney Mike Nifong knew all that information and much more about efforts the lacrosse players had made to cooperate with them.

Why didn’t The N&O tell readers about any of it? Did The N&O not know about that information?

The N&O didn’t report in its first Duke lacrosse story March 24 anything concerning cooperation by the Duke players beyond them submitting as ordered for DNA testing. Perhaps a deadline or something else prevented The N&O from informing readers.

But surely if The N&O knew that information, it should have told readers about it in its March 25 page one, headline story.

I hope readers ask The N&O’s public editor, Ted Vaden, about the questions I’ve raised here.

You can contact him at: ted.vaden@newsobserver.com

In a day or so I’ll post further on how I think The N&O’s March 24 and 25 stories helped make a terrible situation worse, including more dangerous.
_______________________________________

URLs March 24: http://www.newsobserver.com/742/story/421494.html

March 25: http://www.newsobserver.com/102/v-print/story/421799.html

The Churchill Series – May 30, 2006

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life Winston S. Churchill.)

Churchill in India, the Sudan, and South Africa.

In Parliament, Downing Street, and the Admiralty.

Pacing in his study, working in bed and singing in the bath.

Churchill seems at one time or another to have been everywhere.

Everywhere but in the kitchen.

His long-time aide Anthony Montague Browne relates this amusing incident involving a brief conversation:

“…at Downing Street during the early 1950s:

Winston: ‘I shall go to Chartwell next weekend.’

Clementine: ‘Winston, you can't. It's closed and there will be no-one to cook for you.’

Winston: ‘I shall cook for myself. I can boil an egg. I've seen it done.’

Churchill's threat was received in dumfounded silence on all sides but it was not carried out. His gastronomic priorities clearly prevailed!”

Well, folks, I need to run now. I just heard the egg timer ring.
__________________________________________

Douglas J.Hall, Man of Kent, Kentish Man: Churchill, Chartwell, and the Garden of England. (The Churchill Centre, Finest Hour, No. 111, Summer 2001)

To JinC regulars: Another post tonight

Folks,

It been a long day but I want to share some thoughts with you later tonight.

If you come back about 11 p.m., I'll have someting up concerning the Duke lacrosse story, including The N&O's "reporting" of it.


John

Duke lacrosse: CrimeStoppers poster questions.

(Readers note: Alex Charns, attorney for an unindicted Duke lacrosse player, has requested information from the City of Durham and its Police Department concerning publication and distribution of a Durham CrimeStoppers poster containing face-photos of 43 white Duke Men's lacrosse players.

If you're not familiar with the story, this post, "Duke lacrosse: What about the posters?", provides background as do these Durham Herald Sun and WRAL-TV news reports.)

_______________________________

Folks,

Following up on yesterday’s post, "Duke lacrosse: What about the posters?"

I said in that post:

News reports and eyewitness accounts suggest the CrimeStoppers poster Charns is referring to is not the same as the “vigilante poster” The N&O published. But the matter is now in doubt.

I plan to call The N&O tomorrow and ask whether the poster it published was in fact the CrimeStoppers poster or, as I believe, a poster first published by a group that has not so far come forward and identified itself.

I haven’t gotten a call back from The N&O but I found a hard copy of its Apr. 2 West edition which contains a photo of a CrimeStoppers poster on pg. 20A.

The poster’s headline is: PLEASE COME FORWARD.

That’s followed in smaller type by:

”We’re not saying that all 46 were involved. But we do know that some of the players inside that house on that evening knew(sic) what transpired and we need them to come forward”

Durham Police Cpl.
David Addison

ABCNews
3/26/2005 (sic)

Next to all that is this:

Please call Durham CrimeStoppers at 683 -1200. Callers may remain anonymous.

The bulk of the poster is taken up with the face-photos of the 43 white lacrosse players wearing team jerseys.

At the bottom of the poster there’s this in very small type:

Note: There are four more players that were not retrieved from the GoDuke.com website before Duke took down the lacrosse team's roster on Monday morning, March 27th.

The CrimeStoppers poster does not say Duke took down the pictures out of concern for the players' safety.

Not surprisingly, The N&O also doesn't mention why Duke took down the photos.

For that matter, neither the CrimeStoppers poster nor The N&O's story mentions that the lacrosse players who rented the house where the gang-rape is alleged to have occured voluntarily gave statements to the police and offered to take lie detectors tests. (Bold added)

The N&O’s CrimeStoppers photo appears to be one of at least two posters CrimeStoppers published targeting Duke lacrosse players. From the WRAL report:

[Durham city spokeswoman Beverly B. Thompson and police spokeswoman Kammie Michael said the poster was produced by CrimeStoppers, an independent organization that offers rewards for information about crimes, and was not covered by general rules that apply to many police department activities. …

Questions were raised about the first flyer, released in early April, and it was amended within a day or so, [Thompson] said.

So, according to Thompson, there were two CrimeStoppers posters circulating in the community.

That’s not to say there weren’t other posters/flyers targeting the lacrosse players circulating at that time.

We just don't know yet.

Now let's turn to these two questions from yesterday’s post

So who authorized the CrimeStoppers poster? If it was CrimeStoppers, did it do so at the urging of DPD?

I still don’t know the answer to either question but I’ve been trying all day to find out.

Three calls to CrimeStoppers. Each time I’ve been referred on and told I needed to speak to Cpl. Addison.

I’ve left two messages at the line phone number I was given for Addison. Its voice answer begins: “This is Durham CrimeStoppers.” I identified myself as a blogger planning to publish on this story and wanting to fact check. I left a callback number.

The third time I called CrimesStoppers I was given what I was told was Addison’s cell number. Called. Got a voice answer again and left the same message as before.

I also tried to reach Durham City spokeswoman Thompson and got a friendly person who said Thompson wasn’t taking calls but I could call CrimeStoppers and they would tell me “anything you want to know.”

Hmm.

I also called Charns' office. I was told he’s in court today with a trial.

I’ve emailed him asking if he can provide more information on the poster that led to his action. I’d like to see a copy.

I’ve also sent him yesterday’s post and an earlier one I did on biased Duke lacrosse reporting by USA Today, A USA Today Duke lacrosse report: Can you miss its bias?. That post includes a link to a USA Today website where there’s a photo of a “Wanted” or “vigilante” poster being used at a gathering at Duke the night of March 29.

I’ll stay on this and keep you posted.

And if you see Cpl. Addison ask him to please give me a call. I only want to know about how he and CrimeStoppers conducted the public’s business with regard to those Duke lacrosse posters.
___________________________

URLs for this post:

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2006/05/duke-lacrosse-what-about-posters.html

http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-738696.html

http://www.wral.com/news/9280281/detail.html

http://johninnorthcarolina.blogspot.com/2006/05/usa-today-duke-lacrosse-report-can-you_01.html

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/lacrosse/2006-03-29-duke-fallout_x.htm

The Churchill Series – May 29, 2006

(One of series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Kathleen Hill, Marian Holmes, Elizabeth Layton and Peter Kinna don’t get much mention in the history books but we owe them a lot.

During World War II one or another of them was almost always within a few feet of Churchill during the times he worked alone on state matters.

The women would sit with fingers poised over a typewriter keyboard ready to record anything Churchill wished to dictate; Kinna would sit with steno pad and pencil in hand.

Churchill could be working in bed or on a train, ship, or plane. Something in a newspaper story would catch his eye and he’d want to ask a cabinet minister about it. He had only to name the minister and ask the question. It was all recorded and typed. In a minute or two Churchill could review a nicely typed minute he'd just dictated. (I hope you’ll pardon how I put that. – JinC)

A lengthy policy paper from the Foreign Office? Churchill called out questions and made comments as he read through it. When he reached the end of the document, a first draft of his responses to the F.O. paper was ready for review.

The system of always having someone at the ready to record in written form Churchill’s thinking; and then to direct to appropriate parties the results of his thinking in the form of questions, suggestions and directives had a great deal to do with Churchill’s success in leading the British war effort.
__________________________________________
Martin Gilbert, Continue to Pester, Nag and Bite. (pgs. 10-12); and Gilbert, Winston S. Churchill: Finest Hour, 1939-1941. (See index for Kathleen Hill, Marion Holmes, Elizabeth Layton, and Peter Kinna)

Fox News Watch national security duel

Blogger Mark Finkelstein at Newsbusters tells us about a verbal dual at Fox News Watch between lefty media writer Neal Gabler and righty National Review editor Rich Lowry.

As Finlelstein reports:

The topic was the recent press leaks that have compromised a number of highly-classified anti-terrorism programs including the secret prisons for Al-Qaeda members, the monitoring of Al-Qaeda related phone calls and the gathering of phone calling patterns.

From the FNW transcript:

Gabler: "There is a political component with Bush's ratings down, intimidating the press they think is good business and whacking the press is good politics but there is also I think importantly an ideological component.

This campaign against the press clearly was launched by Gonzales as another salient in the idea of executive power that is infallible and unassailable and I think that is one thing we are seeing here and Gonzales said before he retracted it, saying sometimes the First Amendment has to give way to security. And that is one of the things we're seeing and that is not just politics, that is more frightening."

Lowry: "As a matter of practice for decades there was a gentlemen's agreement you didn't go after reporters in the federal national security cases and what happened to blow up the gentlemen's agreement? One Patrick Fitzgerald blew it up. And who was cheerleading him on all along? The press."

Continued Lowry: "And this is a story about about partisan hypocrisy which comes back to bite you and it was it on the part of the press saying 'pursue the leak to the ends of the earth because it will hurt the Bush administration' and now the premises are followed to the logical conclusion and you have the press screaming."

You bet the press is screaming.

It wants the Valerie Plame "leakers" in jail and the NSA leaker journalists preening at the Pulitzer awards banquets.

But the press shouldn't get what it wants.

Here's what should happen:

1) Fitzgerald and his many MSM fans should be forced to explain to the American people just how they think you "blow the cover" of a CIA agent whose neighbors say they knew for years she was CIA, and who's been driving to work at CIA headquerters for at least the last six years.

2) They expalin just how "the outing Valarie Plame" did anything but: a) give Fitzgerald and his associates a secure income and some noteriey for years; b) give MSM a chance to repeatedly attack the President: and c) give the American people a huge bill running now I'll bet into the tens of millions.

3) Those involved in disclosing national security secrets should be arrest, tried, and if convicted sentenced to long prison terms.

The NY Times, the Washington Post, Newsweek, CBS and the rest of them have no right to enganger the rest of us.

And the sooner that's made clear the better.

Duke lacrosse: What about the posters?

It was just two months ago that the Raleigh News & Observer triggered a frenzy that’s engulfed and savaged members of the Duke Men’s lacrosse team present and past along with those defending them and asserting their right to presumption of innocence.

Now comes what may be a turning point in the battle to constrain the frenzied and assure some minimal fairness for the lacrosse players.

A leading constitutional lawyer in central North Carolina wants to take a look at some of what was going on two months ago. He's asking questions some people don't seem eager to answer.

We read in the Durham Herald Sun:

Constitutional lawyer Alex Charns says a police poster unfairly sullied the names of 46 Duke University lacrosse players, implying all were guilty of raping an exotic dancer before the district attorney announced he had sufficient evidence to indict only three.

Charns, representing one of the unindicted players, has requested a police internal investigation in connection with the poster that declared the alleged victim "was sodomized, raped, assaulted and robbed. This horrific crime sent shock waves throughout our community."

Charns said he believed the poster, which offered cash rewards for assistance in sol
ving the case, was displayed around the Duke campus and adjoining neighborhoods.
According to Charns, the poster "impugned the entire lacrosse team." …

The entire H-S story is here.

Charns is talking about a poster published by Durham Crimestoppers. We need to know who authorized the publication of the Crimestoppers poster.

That authorization may or may not have come from the Durham Police Department.

Crimestoppers, as you can read at its website, is organizationally seperate from the DPD.

But the two organizations have a close working relationship. You get an idea of that just by looking at the two organizations' URLs.

http://www.durhampolice.com/

http://www.durhampolice.com/crimestoppers/

A Durham officer is assigned full-time to work with Crimestoppers.

So who authorized the Crimestoppers poster? If it was Crimestoppers, did it do it at the urging of DPD?

If Crimestoppers published the poster on its own, why did it do that?

And is the Crimestoppers poster that same as the “vigilante poster” The N&O published?

News reports and eyewitness accounts suggest the Crimestoppers poster Charns is referring to is not the same as the “vigilante poster” The N&O published. But the matter is now in doubt.

I plan to call The N&O tomorrow and ask whether the poster it published was in fact the Crimestoppers poster or, as I believe, a poster first publilshed by a group that has not so far come forward and identified itself.

I hope I get a direct answer from The N&O. That can often be difficult. While The N&O talks a lot about openness and accountability you often find that …. (You all can finish the sentence, can’t you. – JinC).

I also plan to contact Charns tomorrow.

Look for more here on this matter and other Duke lacrosse case matters.
_____________________________________________

URL for Herald Sun story: http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-738696.html

Memorial Day: "FREEDOM IS NOT FREE"

Michelle Malkin has an outstanding post today, "FREEDOM IN NOT FREE’

It begins with a touching Cox and Forkum cartoon illustrating the hands of a grateful nation passing an American flag folded in triangle shape to the hands of the loved survivors.

Michelle then provides links to some of those honoring our military including La Shawn Barber and Mudville Gazette. We’re reminded The National Moment of Remembrance takes place at 3pm local time today for one minute. Op-For has President Reagan's tribute to the troops at Normandy. Dustin Hawkins has more memorable Memorial Day speeches. And there’s a lot more.

Michelle brings up Haditha and says while it’s casting a pall on this day, it cannot be ignored. She right.

She notes that chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, told CBS:

"[I]t would be premature for me to judge" the outcome of a Pentagon investigation into the killing of as many as a dozen Iraqi civilians by Marines.

But at the same time, Marine Gen. Peter Pace said he believes it’s critically important to make the point that if certain service members are responsible for an atrocity there, they "have not performed their duty the way that 99.9 percent of their fellow Marines have."

The post includes links to many Haditha news stories including ones at Time and the New York Times.

The final part of Michelle’s post is a tribute to Marine Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas who was died after an IED exploded beside his vehicle in Haditha. He was on his second tour of duty in Iraq. R.I.P. and comfort to his family and friends.

I hope you all visit Michelle’s post.

N. Y. Times dissembles in Kerry story

Senator John Kerry is at it again. But he says this time he really will disprove all those things the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth brought to public attention during the 2004 presidential campaign.

The New York Times lends Kerry a hand today with a 1700-word, front page promo piece, "Kerry Pressing Swift Boat Case Long After Loss."

Here’s part of it:

[A]mong those who were on the front lines of the 2004 campaign, the battle over Mr. Kerry's wartime service continues, out of the limelight but in some ways more heatedly — because unlike then, Mr. Kerry has fully engaged in the fight. Only those on Mr. Kerry's side, however, have gathered new evidence to support their case.

Sounds like what you’d expect from a Kerry press release, doesn’t it?

A number of bloggers have already torpedoed this latest example of Times’ political partisanship cloaked as news reporting. See, for example, Lorie Byrd at Wizbang, Ed Driscoll,and Tom Maguire at JustOneMinute.

But I want to fire my own round at a piece of outright New York Times dissembling.

The dissembling appears in the following paragraph referencing Swiftvet organizer John O’Neill and Kerry's 1971 testimony before the U.S. Senate's Foreign Relations committee. The paragraph contains the Times' only mention of Kerry's 1971 testimony:

Mr. O'Neill said he "would be thrilled to look at anything [Kerry] wants to send." Still, he added, "I'm sorry he never apologized for his 1971 speech," referring to Mr. Kerry's testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, in which he told other soldiers' accounts of ravaging Vietnamese villages and citizens. "I think it would have been a very positive thing to do in terms of the many thousands of people who survived Vietnam and felt that was very hurtful." (Bold mine)

The Times' description of Kerry's testimony as telling "other soldiers’ accounts of ravaging Vietnam villages and citizens" is dissembling by virtue of the Times' silence regarding what it knows are the most notorious and disputed parts of Kerry's testimony.

The Times knows Kerry accused the American military at every level of command of being fully aware of war crimes committed on a daily basis. His exact words to the committee were:

“war crimes committed in Southeast Asia, not isolated incidents but crimes committed on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all levels of command.”

The Times knows Kerry told the committee his fellow Vietnam veterans, millions of them, were monsters. His exact words to the committee were:

The country doesn't know it yet, but it has created a monster, a monster in the form of millions of men who have been taught to deal and to trade in violence.

Kerry’s 1971 Senate testimony and his failure to ever apologize for sliming millions who served honorably tells us a lot about him.

And the Times’ dissembling about Kerry’s testimony tells us a lot about it.

And who’s surprised to see one in the service of the other?

They’re a “go together” duo.

It's just sad they'd present their dissembling on Memorial Day weekend.

UPDATE: May 29, 2006 - I just found at Confederate Yankee a fine post with a labeled aerial photo that leads CY blogger Bob Owens to say:

John Kerry did not take anyone into Cambodia from his swift boat based at Ha Tien. The navigable Giang Thanh River runs near the Cambodian border, but at no point does it ever cross.

Take a look. Kerry may have that magic hat but Bob's got a real photo.

There are new Duke lacrosse discrepancies

I hope someone with a love for advanced math and a calculator is keeping a count of all the discrepancies in the Duke lacrosse case.

Here are the latest.

Conflicting accounts by the accuser's father and the man reported to have driven her to the party concerning the accuser’s actions and whereabouts during the hours immediately preceding her arrival at the party at which she says she was gang-raped.

The conflicting accounts appear in two separate Raleigh News & Observer news stories.

Let’s start with today’s N&O story containing the account of the man said to be the driver:

Accuser seemed OK early on, driver says

Excerpts:

Brian Taylor, who met the accuser at a Super Bowl party two years ago, said he spent an hour and a half with her before driving her to the party where she was hired to dance. (Bolds in this post mine)

"She had called me a few hours earlier, asking me if she could use my place to get ready," Taylor said Friday.

Taylor said he did not know how the woman, a 27-year-old N.C. Central University student with two children, got to his home March 13. But he said that when she arrived about 9 p.m., he noticed nothing unusual about her demeanor. He did not say whether they consumed any alcohol.

Taylor had known for a while that his guest was a dancer. He and a male friend had watched her perform at clubs in Smithfield and Hillsborough.

As he sat in front of his PlayStation console March 13, the accuser showered behind a closed door and modeled at least two negligees for her host, he said.

"She asked my opinion," he said. "The first one was this black outfit, and I said, 'No.' When she came out in the red one I said, 'That's better.' "

It was 10:45 p.m., Taylor estimated, when they left for 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.

"The deal was for me to take her over there for about a two-hour show," he said. "She was supposed to call me to come pick her up."

Taylor did not hear from her again until 7 a.m. the next day. She was at Duke Hospital.

Now lets look at part of a May 19 N&O story of the accuser’s father’s account of her activities and whereabouts during those same few hours The N&O reported today Bryan Taylor described:

In an interview earlier this week, her father said he saw his daughter a few times March 13. That afternoon, he said, she picked up her two children from elementary school.

About 9:30 p.m., he said, she brought the children to their grandparents' house for the evening.

"She was fine," he said.

After their arrival, he and his daughter took a short car ride about 10 p.m. to a neighborhood convenience store at Cornwallis Road and South Roxboro Street. He bought a pack of cigarettes but said he did not recall what his daughter purchased.

When the two returned to his house, the woman said she had to go out and wouldn't return until 1:30 a.m.

He said he does not know whether she left in her own car or someone picked her up. He said she did call him to say she safely reached her destination -- about 11:30 p.m., about the start of a late-night talk show he was watching.

The man said he did not know his daughter was working as an escort that night. She didn't return until late the morning of March 14, the father said.

Did you get all that?

Taylor the driver says in today’s N&O the accuser came to his place “about 9 p.m.” He spent “about an hour and a half with her,” during which time she showered and modeled lingerie. He estimates that at about 10:45 p.m., he and the accuser left his place for the party.

Taylor makes no mention of her leaving his place at anytime between her arrival “about 9 p.m.” and their departure for the party.

But The N&O reported on May 19 that the accuser’s father said she arrived at his home about 9:30 p.m., and brought her children with her. He says about 10 p.m. he and his daughter drove to neighborhood convenience store, made some purchases and returned to his house.

The father says sometime after that the accuser left his house by car but he doesn’t know whether it was in her own (Does she in fact own one? – JinC) or whether someone else drove her away.

It's impossible to reconcile Taylor and the father's accounts, isn’t it?

And The N&O doesn’t even try. Instead, it just ignores its May 19 story.

The N&O also doesn’t mention whether it asked Taylor if he had sex with the accuser the evening of the alleged rape. Defense attorneys say evidence they’ve received from DA Nifong indicates two men who drove the accuser to the party each had sex with her that night, as did her boyfriend.

You’re most likely asking, “Why didn’t The N&O ask Taylor about having sex with her? And what about this second guy who’s supposed to have also ridden with the accuser to the party?”

Good questions. You have to wonder about The N&O’s reporting, don’t you?

I’m sending a link to this post to Anne Blythe, the reporter who’s bylined for today’s N&O story and Jim Nesbitt, Joseph Neff, and Samiha Khanna, the reporters bylined for The N&O's May 19 story.

I'll let you know what, if anything, I hear back from any of them.

I’ll say more about all of this in a post tonight.

The Churchill Series – May 26, 2006

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

On May 21, 1952 during Prime Minister's Question Time Labour Member Colonel Lipton asked:

“Will the Prime Minister state which Commonwealth Governments have been invited to send observers to the British atom bomb tests in Australia?”

Churchill responded:

“None, sir.”

Lipton pressed just as we see members do now on C-SPAN’s replays of PM’s Question Time:

“Is it not desirable when the economic and other relationships between the Commonwealth countries are more disrupted than they have been, that they should be brought into consideration which would enable Commonwealth observers to be present?

May I ask the Prime Minister if he will condescend to answer that question?

If he is not interested in the matter, then of course he need not answer the question."

Churchill:

“It was after full consideration of all those points that I gave my somewhat comprehensive or rather exclusively comprehensive answer, ‘None, sir.’”

Modeling somewhat C-SPAN’s Question Time signoff I end with:

“And please join us again on Monday, May 29, for another edtion of The Churchill Series.”

________________________________
The Churchill Centre, Prime Minister's Questions.

Duke Women's "attire" exposes Boston Globe columnist

Boston Globe columnist and editor Jackie MacMullan wants us to believe she’s really concerned about the Duke Women's lacrosse players. I wonder if she fooled anyone.

MacMullan begins:

They want to make a statement, yet they will not speak.

They want to concentrate solely on the most important task in front of them -- winning a national championship -- but with a conscious choice of game-time attire, they will outfit themselves with the ultimate distraction.

And just what is the “game-time attire” that so concerns MacMullan?

Sweatbands with “Innocent” on them.

It has to do with alleged "gang-rape" and indictments. Remember?

MacMullan tells Globe readers other college sports teams have had bad experiences. She’s seen it all.

What concerns her now, MacMullan says, is that the Duke lacrosse women may be too close to the Duke lacrosse men; and therefore too willing to identify with and support them in their current "vulnerability."

MacMullan explains:

It's possible the Duke lacrosse women are feeling a bit vulnerable themselves these days. The Duke women have likely experienced a range of emotions, from shock to anger to sadness.

Ah, yes, we've all heard how emotional women can be.

I’ve witnessed some of it myself, including many women's disgust and outrage at the inflammatory and biased news reporting of the Duke lacrosse case

But MacMullan excludes disgust and outrage from the range of emotions she says the Duke women have experienced. Who’s surprised?

And who’s surprised that she fails to mention that many women experiencing great emotional stress act with cool intelligence and great courage. They often do so while experiencing condescension, derision and outright opposition from clods male and female.

Now let's go on and finish with MacMullan.

She warns the Duke lacrosse women of the consequences of their “game-time attire:”

There will be backlash from those who support the alleged victim.

No one doubts that. The accuser’s supporters have printed “vigilante posters” with face photos of the Men’s lacrosse players and “Wanted” stamped on them.

They’ve helped bring the New Black Panther Party to Durham.

Death threats have been shouted at the indicted.

The Duke lacrosse women know that the shouts of "Justice will be done" are verbatim what was shouted in the South prior to lynchings, and in the North prior to race riots.

I’m sure the Duke women thought of all that; just as I’m sure they know they’ll encounter some of that in Boston, along with many people who are decent and fair-minded.

In case anyone got near the end of MacMullan’s column and was still fooled by her affectation of concern for the Duke women, MacMullan gives herself away with a bungled attempt at sarcastic humor:

But the truth is the Duke women don't know whether those lacrosse players are innocent any more than we do -- unless they were present that night, and all accounts suggest they weren't.

Isn't that pathetic.

Bostonians are reputed to be intelligent people. I don’t question that.

So I wonder what they think when one of their hometown papers serves them a column like MacMullan’s.

Any journalist, blogger or reader want to offer an answer?

If I get enough responses, I'll bring them forward from the thread and put them in a post.

"Innocent" sweatband story: Raleigh N&O's a day late and 8 paragraphs down

The McClatchy Company’s Raleigh News & Observer finally reported on the Duke Women’s lacrosse team decision to wear “Innocent” stamped on their sweatbands during this weekend’s final four NCAA championship games.

The N&O did so only after national news organizations including the AP and ABC News carried the story first reported by The N&O's much small competitor, the Durham Herald Sun.

It’s revealing to compare national news organizations' reporting with The N&O's.

ABC News, for example, headlined:

Duke Women's Lacrosse to Wear 'Innocent' Bands

ABC used the AP’s text. Here are the first two paragraphs:

In a show of solidarity with the Duke University men's lacrosse team, members of the school's women's team plan to wear sweatbands with the word "Innocent" written on them.

"We want to win a national championship for ourselves, but definitely also for the university and the men's team," junior Leigh Jester told the newspaper. "They don't really have a chance to play their season, which is a shame."

ABC's headline and the AP's text are typical of how other news organizations I located using a Google search reported the "Innocent" sweatband story on Wednesday, May 25.

Now look at what The N&O offered its readers a day later:

Duke women focus on lacrosse despite troubles of men’s team

The story doesn’t mention the “Innocent” sweatbands until the second sentence of the eighth paragraph. Talk about "buried in the deep."

Except for The N&O, all the “Innocent” sweatband news stories I’ve read quote Duke lacrosse player Leigh Jester as saying:

"We want to win a national championship for ourselves, but definitely also for the university and the men's team.”

The N&O offers readers this quote:

"Obviously, we want to win it for ourselves -- everyone wants a national championship -- but it's nice to be able to be the face of your school and to be recognized nationally for that.

Obviously, if we had to do it all over again, we'd rather not have the attention because of the situation."

The News & Observer advertises itself as "Fair and Accurate."

No kidding, they do.

The Churchill Series – May 25, 2006

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

During the winter of 1931/32 Churchill made an extensive lecture tour in the United States.

It was on that tour that Churchill was struck and almost killed by a taxi while crossing New York’s Fifth Avenue.

During a lengthy convalescence, part of which was spent in the Waldorf Astoria Hotel, Churchill and his bodyguard, Scotland Yard Detective Inspector Walter Thompson, realized they had not registered or received permits for the pistols they carried.

They agreed Thompson would take the pistols down to Police headquarters and set matters right.

When Thompson returned to the Waldorf, he explained to Churchill what had happened.

The police had been very polite but they’d made it clear people were not supposed to carry guns in the city.

Thompson protested that extremist groups, some active in the Untied States, had repeatedly threatened to kill Churchill. Not only that, Thompson had read in the morning’s paper of five murders just the previous day.

The police said they understand his position but there were still those laws.

Thompson continued pressing. Soon he was told the Police Chief himself would speak to him.

The Chief had been briefed on the problem. “We can’t give you official permission,” he told Thompson. Then he added: “But if you have to use weapons just let us know and we will square it for you.”

Churchill took it all in before telling Thompson the Americans were “an amazing people.”
____________________________________________________
Tom Hickman, Churchill's Bodyguard. (pgs. 70-71)

All aboard the Congressional Double Standard

You don't want to miss this at Outside the Beltway.

Be sure to read past the bumper sticker part to where you learn hats and t-shirts are now available too.

Do you think Denny and the rest of the Republican leadership team knew this stuff would happen? Did President Bush's new White House team give him any advance notice?

One thing's for sure: Nancy and the Democratic leadership certainly didn't tell them.

I mean, why would Dems try to stop a GOP train wreck?

Even Howard Dean knows better than to do that.

It's so sad.

Defending the ACLU dissidents

The New York Times reports:

The American Civil Liberties Union is weighing new standards that would discourage its board members from publicly criticizing the organization's policies and internal administration.

"Where an individual director disagrees with a board position on matters of civil liberties policy, the director should refrain from publicly highlighting the fact of such disagreement," the committee that compiled the standards wrote in its proposals. ...

Well, now, who’ll defend the ACLU board dissidents’ right to free speech?

Certainly not the ACLU. There isn’t a prayer of that, if you’ll excuse the expression.

And I don’t expect Moveon.org to move in and say they’ll fund the dissidents’ legal defense.

But The Federalist Society! Now there’s the group to lead the defense.

And do it pro bono. It would be a great national service.

Imagine attorneys who were once law clerks of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito striding shoulder-to-shoulder with the ACLU dissidents into a federal courthouse to defend the dissidents and demand they be granted whistleblower status.

I can’t wait. I hope C-SPAN covers it all.

Hat Tip: Betsy Newmark

More Raleigh N&O failure to report Duke lacrosse news

The McClatchy Company’s Raleigh News & Observer is proud of its Duke lacrosse coverage, with its exec editor for news, Melanie Sill, crowing it’s “pushed hard” on the story.

Examples of what she means:

1) publication of the infamous “vigilante poster” containing face-photos of 40 lacrosse players and “WANTED” stamped on it;

2) describing Duke’s campus as “beer-sotted;”

3) searching courthouse records using Duke Men’s lacrosse team rosters as far back as 1999 for any legal charge involving any person whose name appeared on any of the rosters.

But for all its hard pushing, The N&O continues to slant, underreport or just plain ignore certain important Duke lacrosse stories.

The latest?

On Wednesday, May 24, The N&O failed to report two stories its smaller rival, The Durham Herald Sun, and national media reported.

The first concerned the Duke Women’s lacrosse team’s decision to wear “Innocent” stamped on their sweatbands as they play this weekend in Boston for the NCAA Woman’s national championship. Excerpts from the Durham H-S:

"Obviously we want to win a national championship for ourselves, but definitely also for the university and the men's team," junior Leigh Jester said. "They don't really have a chance to play their season, which is a shame.

"We'd love to bring it home not only for ourselves, but also for them."

The second story concerned defense claims that evidence provided last Friday by DA Nifong’s office.

As reported in the Durham H-S the defense claims the evidence reveals the accuser told police “she had sex with three men around the time of the alleged rape.” The men are “identified as her boyfriend and two drivers for the escort service for which she worked.” The Durham H-S said “Nifong would neither confirm nor deny the defense claims."

But on May 24 The N&O couldn’t find anything it thought its faithful readers should know about anything having to do with the Duke lacrosse case. But on the previous day it did.

The N&O’s Tuesday, May 23, front page contained an above the fold headline story:

Lie tests rankle victim backers

”Victim backers?”

The N&O really gives its bias away with its headline, doesn’t it?

As for an accuser’s backers being rankled by use of lie detectors, in the Duke lacrosse case who has trouble understanding why the accuser’s backers would be rankled by anything that helps get at the truth?

The N&O’s ignoring the two stories while pushing hard with, Lie tests rankle victim backers, is just what you’d expect from the newspaper that’s been nicknamed, “The Prosecutor’s Friend.”

Update: The N&O just got around to mentioning in the sports section of its May 25 edition the Women’s decision to wear the “Innocent” sweatbands. I’ll post about that N&O’s report this evening. Meanwhile, you can read it here.

If you compare The N&O reporting on the "Innocent" sweatbands to that of other news organizations, I think you'll agree there’s no danger The N&O will lose its “Prosecutor’s Friend” nickname.

The Churchill Series - May 24, 2006

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

At a dinner party a while back someone asked, “John, what books did Churchill read?”

Well, you don’t really try to answer such a question, do you?

A polite response with a little information is all that’s called for, and others will carry on.

I responded something like this:

Well, when he was 13 he asked his mother to buy him a copy of U. S. Grant’s Memoirs.

When he was in India in his early twenties, he read many of the classics, including Gibbon’s Decline and Fall.

During WW II he readHuckleberry Finn.

And late in Churchill’s life his physician, Lord Moran, found him in bed reading Orwell’s 1984. Churchill told Moran it was his second reading.

One last thing: After the war, Churchill developed a small but very good racing stable. So he would often use thoroughbred stud books, although I don’t know that anything he learned in them ever appeared in his speeches.

Do you know of a book Churchill read that you’d like to call to our attention? How about a reference he later made to a book he'd read?

If I get enough responses, I’ll put a post together.

Duke's Women's Lacrosse Team Shows Support

At MSNBC this headline and story:

Duke lacrosse women to wear 'innocent' bands

Duke University women's lacrosse team members will wear sweatbands that read "innocent" in their game against Northwestern in the Final Four on Friday in Boston to show their support for three members of the men's team who are charged with raping a stripper during a team house party, the Durham Herald-Sun reported Wednesday.

"Obviously we want to win a national championship for ourselves, but definitely also for the university and the men's team," junior Leigh Jester told the newspaper. "They don't really have a chance to play their season, which is a shame.

"We'd love to bring it home not only for ourselves, but also for them."

Mike Pressler, who resigned as the men's coach April 5, talked to the women's team after practice Tuesday, the newspaper said.

"I think his message was a little bit more believing in themselves and looking at the year we had in spite of the difficulties that Duke and the lacrosse program have seen," women's coach Kerstin Kimel told the Herald-Sun.

That’s a fine gesture by the Women’s lacrosse team which the Men’s team, their families and friends will certainly appreciate it.

If you’re familiar with Duke lacrosse, you know there’s a history of mutually shared respect and support between the Men’s and Women’s programs.

But MSM doesn’t tell you much about that. Too tough to fit within their story frame.

Katrina reporting: MSM's "best" was very wrong

Slowly the American people are being told the truth: MSM got the post-Katrina rescue and recovery story very, very wrong.

Jonah Goldberg makes a contribution to the emerging truth in his LA Times column, “The Media’s Imperfect Storm.” Excerpts:

[It] is difficult to think of a bigger media scandal in my lifetime than the fraudulently inaccurate coverage of Hurricane Katrina.

Where to begin?

As I've written before, virtually all of the gripping stories from Katrina were untrue. All of those stories about, in Paula Zahn's words, "bands of rapists, going block to block"? Not true.

The tales of snipers firing on medevac helicopters? Bogus.

The yarns, peddled on "Oprah" by New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and the New Orleans police chief, that "little babies" were getting raped in the Superdome and that the bodies of the murdered were piling up? Completely false.

The stories about poor blacks dying in comparatively huge numbers because American society "left them behind"? Nah-ah.

While most outlets took Nagin's estimate of 10,000 dead at face value, Editor and Publisher - the watchdog of the media - ran the headline, "Mortuary Director Tells Local Paper 40,000 Could Be Lost in Hurricane."

In all of Louisiana, not just New Orleans, the total dead from Katrina was roughly 1,500. Blacks did not die disproportionately, nor did the poor.

The only group truly singled out in terms of mortality was the elderly. According to a Knight-Ridder study, while only 15 percent of the population of New Orleans was over the age of 60, some 74 percent of the dead were 60 or older, and almost half were older than 75. Blacks were, if anything, slightly underrepresented among the dead given their share of the population.

This barely captures how badly the press bungled Katrina coverage.

And yet, a ubiquitous media chorus claims simultaneously that Katrina was Bush's worst hour and the press's best.

That faultless paragon of media scrupulousness Dan Rather proclaimed it one of the "quintessential great moments in television news." Christiane Amanpour explained, "I think what's interesting is that it took a Katrina, you know, to bring us back to where we belong. In other words, real journalists, real journalism, and I think that's a good thing."

So the media believes their Katrina reporting showed them at their best?

Well, who are we to argue that? Let’s concede their point.

That leads to the question: who’ll provide reliable information to citizens who need it if democracy is to function properly?

Enter the blogs.

I’ll say more on Katrina coverage soon.

Meanwhile, Goldberg’s column is here. I hope you read it. He says plenty about the role of the military in the rescue operations, a part of the story MSM "missed."

The Churchill Series – May 23, 2006

(One of a series of weekday posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill. )

Below, in three paragraphs for reader’s ease, are words that appear as a single paragraph in Churchill’s Their Finest Hour. They are extraordinarily wise and speak of the best that is in us. That said, they need no further commentary from me.

The efficiency of a war administration depends mainly upon whether decisions emanating from the highest approved authority are in fact strictly, faithfully, and punctually obeyed. This we achieved in Britain in this time of crisis owing to the intense fidelity , comprehension, and whole-hearted resolve of the War Cabinet upon the essential purpose to which we had devoted ourselves . According to the directions given ship , troops, and aeroplanes moved, and the wheels of factories spun.

By all these processes, and by the confidence, indulgence, and loyalty by which I was upborne, I was soon able to give an integral direction to almost every aspect of the war. This was really necessary because times were so very bad.

The method was accepted because everyone realized how near were death and ruin. Not only individual death, which is the universal experience, stood near, but , incomparably more commending the life of Britain, her message, and her glory.

__________________________________________________
Winston S. Churchill, Their Finest Hour. (pgs. 21-22)

Republican leaders seem like Palestinian leaders

Democratic Congressman William Jefferson and $90 thousand in cold cash are the "stars" of an FBI criminal investigation.

So how are congressional Republicans reacting?

According to USA Today’s Deadline they’re upset. They don’t like what’s happened.

So they're ready to declare themselves the party of honest government? Not quite.

USA headlines:

GOP challenges FBI raid of Jefferson's office

Displaying bipartisanship for one of their own, House Republican leaders are expressing concern that the FBI's search of the Capitol office of Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson crossed the constitutional boundary between the White House and Congress.

Tuesday, House Majority Leader John Boehner called the weekend raid "the Justice Department's invasion of the legislative branch" and predicted the issue would "end up across the street at the Supreme Court."…

In the Washington Post we learn:

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said that he is "very concerned" about the incident and that Senate and House counsels will review it.

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) expressed alarm at the raid. "The actions of the Justice Department in seeking and executing this warrant raise important Constitutional issues that go well beyond the specifics of this case," he said in a lengthy statement released last night.

So what should people do about leaders like that?

Glenn Reynolds at Instapundit has a suggestion and some commentary:

CUT THEIR PAY AND SEND THEM HOME

GOP Congress members are objecting to the FBI raid on bribery suspect Rep. William Jefferson. I'd approve of this bipartisan spirit if it weren't just an example of the only kind of bipartisanship you can really count on from Congress -- standing shoulder to shoulder in defense of insiders' perks and against the interests of the voters.

That sounds pretty good to me.

Watching Republican leaders this past year has me thinking of what people often say of Palestinian leaders: They never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

JinC Update: Glenn updated with this from Freeman Hunt:

Sort of like a man who catches his cheating spouse in the act and all she can say is "I can't believe you didn't knock!"

Duke lacrosse commentary - May 23, 2006

At History News Network there’s a post: “Where's the AG?” It begins:

North Carolina's attorney general is Democrat Roy Cooper; under the state's somewhat peculiar prosecutorial structure, he has authority to take control of the Duke lacrosse case away from Durham DA Mike (Ahab) Nifong. It seems as if the time has come for Cooper to act. …

On the post’s comment thread there was this:

"inexplicable" is a good choice of words. Since Nifong has been re-nominated and faces no opposition in a general election, you cannot attribute his conduct of the case to his current political ambitions.

That was followed by this comment:

I agree--there's no plausible or even conceivable political motive at this stage. Simply from a practical angle, why would a prosecutor not want to look at defense evidence, even if only to see what the defense has?

The post and comments were made right after the third player, David Evans, was indicted.

My reactions:

Yes, in certain circumstances the NC AG can take a case from a DA. (I’ll leave it to lawyers to explain the circumstances.)

So it’s possible Cooper could step in but I doubt he will, not least because Cooper is a very cautious guy who wants this year’s Democratic Gubernatorial nomination.

Stepping into the DLC won’t make Cooper many friends. But you can imagine the howls from the activist mob and their media allies if Cooper replaces Nifong.

Nifong upsets some of us who believe in due process and presumption of innocence but the activist/media crowd think he’s “just fine, thank you.”

What Cooper could do short of taking over the case is make a very public statement affirming the rule of law in NC and promising to punish those who interfere with it. But I don’t think he’ll do that although it would be a very wise “ounce of prevention.”

As for, “Nifong … faces no opposition in a general election, you cannot attribute his conduct of the case to his current political ambitions” and “there's no plausible or even conceivable political motive at this stage.”

Those comment’s are extremely naïve.

A plausible motive?

Well, think about it. If you’ve been promising for weeks that is will be three – a trio – do you just go out on stage and announce: “Folks, it’ll be a violin duo tonight. I couldn’t locate a cellist?”

Of course not: you do everything you can to locate a third player. DAs are that way too.

Nifong knows if he hadn’t produced the third indictment, his case would have even less plausibility than it has now.

A political motive?

Yes, Nifong effectively won reelection before he brought the third indictment against Evans. But that doesn’t free him from political pressures.

For the inside players – and Nifong’s one – politics is a 24/7/365 long-term career activity. Politicians begin thinking about the next election once the results of the current one are in. And that next election is often just another step in a 20 or 30 year career plan.

The groups who supported Nifong in his most recent election are, he knows, watching now. In four years time, they’ll remember what they saw.

As to what extent, if any, political considerations actually entered into his actions on the Evans indictment, I don’t know.

I’d be unfair to say they did; and presumptious to say they didn’t.

What I do know is that David Evans, Collin Finnerty, and Reade Seligmann are entitled to due process and presumption of innocence.

Will Nancy Pelosi be Harry Reid’s career ender?

Yes, according to Sherman Frederick, publisher of the Las Vegas Review-Journal:

In 50-plus months, Nevada voters will march to the polls and replace Sen. Harry Reid, thus ending one of the longer, more powerful political runs in state history.

When it happens, political wise guys will remember that Sen. Reid's undoing came early in his last term when he became a big shot in the Democratic Party and quickly morphed into someone Nevada voters did not recognize -- his political girlfriend in the House, uber-liberal Rep. Nancy Pelosi of California. …

Nevadans who see Sen. Reid exercise his position as the Democratic leader of the Senate don't see the hardscrabble conservative Mormon from Searchlight.

They see a political transvestite who forsakes his home state to kowtow to the wildly liberal wing of the Democratic Party. …

You can already color Reid the hue of burnt toast in rural Nevada. Harry has never done well in the cow counties, even when he wasn't slipping into Nancy's clothes and make-up.

But doesn’t Reid have huge support from union leaders and the casino owners?

Yes, but Frederick takes a closer look:

As for labor, Sen. Reid could probably come out in favor of copulation between humans and dogs and still get the support of union executives.

Work-a-day union members, however, are another story. Those folks who work hard for their money and count pennies to raise a family in Las Vegas want real paycheck relief, not tax-till-they-bleed federal programs.

Casino support is good for cash, which is important for any politician, but there is some evidence of a growing backlash within the electorate against gaming industry support.

Also, the instant that polls begin to show any doubt in Sen. Reid's re-election, gaming money splinters. If there is one thing casino management knows how to do, it is how to hedge a bet.

The whole thing’s worth a read.

By the way, don’t you love some of Frederick’s metaphors? The guy knows how to mix humor with sharp political commentary.

Hey, that gives me an idea!

We all know about the troubles the liberal Air America network’s been having.

We can’t do anything about its financial scandals.

But those low ratings? Maybe something can be done about them.

I’m going to send this post to Brian Maloney at Radio Equalizer.

No one's worked harder than Brian to help Air America realize what it has to do to grow its audience base into the thousands.

Brian could use Frederick’s column to show Air America’s biggest anchor, Al Franken, just what sharp, humorous political commentary is.

I mean, when Franken says “big, fat idiot” for the zillionth time, he expects to get a laugh and is confused when he doesn't.

But what if Brian told Franken about Frederick and commentary like “slipping into Nancy's clothes and make-up?”

Franken might change and people might begin asking, “When did Al Franken get funny?

How about it, Brian? Won't you give Franken one last chance?

The Churchill Series – May 22, 2006

(One of a series of weekdays posts on the life of Winston S. Churchill.)

Churchill ends his autobiography, My Early Life, with the oft quoted words: “until September 1908, when I married and lived happily ever afterwards.”

It was a wonderful marriage, with Clementine’s love, judgment and loyalty sustaining Churchill in both the domestic and public parts of his life.

But as in any marriage, there were “moments.” Churchill’s long-time bodyguard, Scotland Yard Detective-Inspector Walter Thompson tells us about one of them that occurred in the late 20s..

The Churchills were about to drive in an open two-seater from London down to Chartwell. Thompson sat in the back in what the Brits call the dickie seat (our rumble seat).

This was one of those rare times when Churchill was ready first. Soon Clementine joined him.

Thompson carries the story from there:

[Clementine] appeared dressed in a most gorgeous black dress decorated with gold thread. Winston voiced his delight. “Clemmie,” he said, “you look beautiful. What a lovely dress.”

“I am so pleased you like it, darling,” she replied, as she took her seat beside him.

It was not until we were out in the country that the dress was again mentioned . Winston gazed sideways and quietly said: “And what did it cost?”

She replied: “I dare not tell you.”

“I thought not, he said. “I am sure it was very expensive.”

“I will tell you later, Winston,” she replied.

“But there is no harm in knowing now, in view of the fact you have bought it.”

The car almost came to a standstill when she said: “Two hundred guineas.”

“I suppose,” he said, “you have not paid for it yet?”

“Let us talk about it later,” she replied.

Dead silence followed and not another word was said.

Shh. I don’t know about you, but I’m not going to break the silence.
___________________________________
Tom Hickman, Churchill's Bodyguard. (p. 219)

Prayer in school OK if it’s Muslim

Folks, you may not believe what’s coming in this post.

From Investors Business Daily, May 19:

In our brave new schools, Johnny can't say the pledge, but he can recite the Quran.

Yup, the same court that found the phrase "under God" unconstitutional now endorses Islamic catechism in public school.

In a recent federal decision that got surprisingly little press, even from conservative talk radio, California's 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled it's OK to put public-school kids through Muslim role-playing exercises, including:

Reciting aloud Muslim prayers that begin with "In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful . . . ."

Memorizing the Muslim profession of faith: "Allah is the only true God and Muhammad is his messenger."

Chanting "Praise be to Allah" in response to teacher prompts. …

Designing prayer rugs, taking an Arabic name and essentially "becoming a Muslim" for two full weeks.

Parents of seventh-graders, who after 9-11 were taught the pro-Islamic lessons as part of California's world history curriculum, sued under the First Amendment ban on religious establishment. They argued, reasonably, that the government was promoting Islam.

But a federal judge appointed by President Clinton told them in so many words to get over it, that the state was merely teaching kids about another "culture." …

In the California course on world religions, Christianity is not presented equally. It's covered in just two days and doesn't involve kids in any role-playing activities.

But kids do get a good dose of skepticism about the Christian faith, including a biting history of its persecution of other peoples. In contrast, Islam gets a pass from critical review. …

This case is critical not just to our culture but our national security. It should be brought before the Supreme Court, which has outlawed prayer in school. Let's see what it says about practicing Islam in class. It will be a good test for the bench's two new conservative justices.

See what I mean about hard to believe?

Sure, a teacher closing the classroom door and indoctrinating kids: We know that happens all the time.

And what about those loopy curricula defining America/Judeo-Christian values/whites/and males as not good while defining the U.N./Muslim laws/protestors/and "activists" as just fine?

We know there are many such curricula out there endorsed by the liberal/leftist teachers’ union, the National Education Association, and approved by equally liberal/leftist school boards.

But that a federal court of appeals, even one as liberal/leftist as the 9th Circuit, would go along with such a curriculum? I’d never have predicated that.

The case can’t get to the Supreme Court soon enough to suit me.

How about you?

And do any of you know if the people who will appeal the decision have a “tip jar?”

I’d like to contribute.

Hat Tip: Michelle Malkin

Does the GOP favor Vote Fraud Protection?

Since it’s become easier to vote – in some places you only have to show up on election day and not too many questions are asked – Americans are increasingly alarmed that non-citizens, felons, and repeat voters are deciding elections.

Today John Fund in the WSJ has plenty to say about what should be called Vote Fraud Protection. Excerpts:

Amid all the disputes over immigration in Congress, one amendment is being proposed that in theory should unite people in both parties. How about requiring that everyone show some form of identification before voting in federal elections?

Polls show overwhelming support for the idea, and there is increasing concern that more illegal aliens are showing up on voter registration rolls.

But the fact that photo ID isn't likely to pass shows both how deeply emotional the immigration issue has become and how bitter congressional politics have become with elections only 5 1/2 months away.

Mitch McConnell, the Senate Republican whip, is proposing the photo ID amendment. He notes that Mexico and many other countries require the production of such identification in their own elections, and that the idea builds on the suggestion of last year's bipartisan election reform commission headed by former president Jimmy Carter and former secretary of state James Baker.

The Carter-Baker commission issued 87 recommendations to improve the functioning of election systems. …

[The] biggest surprise was that 18 of 21 commissioners backed a requirement that voters show some form of photo identification. They argued that with Congress passing the Real ID Act to standardize security protections for drivers' licenses in all 50 states, the time had come to standardize voter ID requirements.

Former Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle joined two other commissioners in complaining that the ID requirements would be akin to a Jim Crow-era "poll tax" and would restrict voting among the poor or elderly who might lack such an ID.
Mr. Daschle's racially charged analogy is preposterous.

Almost everyone needs photo ID in today's modern world. Andrew Young, the former Atlanta mayor and U.N. ambassador, believes that in an era when people have to show ID to rent a video or cash a check, "requiring ID can help poor people" who otherwise might be even more marginalized by not having one.

Republicans who keep asking, “How can we get voters back on our side?” might ask themselves a question.

Do they have a strategy for assuring voters that the GOP is the party of Vote Fraud Protection?

Why not legislation in this session of the Congress to make photo IDs necessary starting in the ’08 presidential election?

Sure, there will be those like Daschle who’ll scream “racism”. That won’t be anything new.

If fact, it will be a lot like Democratic Minority Senate Leader Harry Reid screaming “racism” in response to a proposal to make English America’s official language.

If the GOP is out front on both those issues they’ll be doing what’s best for America and I think helping themselves in the bargain.

On the other hand, if many GOP Members of Congress are going to get into a lot of hemming and hawing about this and that concerning the two issues, I think a lot of voters might just hem and haw at home on election day.

Fund’s entire column is here.

For commencement speakers: The best advice I've heard

Commencement speakers are expected to give advice to graduates. But who gives advice to the speakers?

I suppose speaker selection committees do a little of that, but I can’t think of too many others who do.

But one who does come to mind is former House Majority Leader Dick Armey. And his is the best advice I’ve ever heard given to graduation speakers.

The following words may not quote Armey exactly but they're very close to what he said :

Just say a few sensible things that people with diverse opinions can agree on.

And keep it short. Five, maybe six minutes at most.

The people there didn’t come to hear you speak. They came to see someone they love graduate.

Why I admire the Duke lacrosse judge

Yesterday I told regular visitors I’d post today about Durham Superior Court Judge Ronald (Ron) L. Stephens, the presiding judge in the proceedings relating to the Duke lacrosse case.

I’m a Durham resident and am not an attorney. However, I’ve spent a lot of time during the last 30 years in the courts and with law enforcement agencies in this part of North Carolina. (No, I’m not a career criminal. It’s all been honest professional work, mostly as an expert witness.)

I’ve had a number of dealings with Stephens, both when he was the Durham DA and later when he went on the bench. Also, although he and I are by no means personal friends, in a town the size of Durham, people often “bump into” each other at youth activity events, charity fundraisers, etc. So I’ve has those contacts too.

I admire Ron Stephens. I think he has the qualities a good judge should have: He’s very intelligent. He listens well. In court he explains his rulings carefully and clearly. He speaks no louder than necessary and always to the point. He won’t use five words when four will do.

He has a fine understanding of his fellow human beings; and can be very patient as they struggle to “get it right.” But don’t offer him baloney. He hates it, and will toss it right back at you.

Stephens is not one to hold up law books and opine at length, but the best attorneys I know say he knows and cares about “the law.” Often I’ve heard them say he sees judging as a calling.

Is he tough? Yes, whenever necessary. At first some people aren't aware of the toughness. That can be a mistake. Don’t push Judge Stephens. He’s no Lance Ito.

If you were to meet Stephens around town, you’d find him a nicely groomed, conservatively dressed guy who’s easy to talk to, doesn’t take himself too seriously, and wants to help you if he can. You might also notice he has a nice sense of humor.

But back to tough. Stephens will often have to be just that as “activists” with no respect for due process and law work to turn the Duke proceedings into a circus while media stand by ready to report and broadcast their assaults on justice.

Last Thursday, May 18, some “activists” made their first move during Reade Seligmann’s first court appearance. As reported the following day in the Durham Herald Sun:

With protesters demonstrating outside the judicial building, Superior Court Judge Ron Stephens admonished those in the packed courtroom to be quiet and respect the proceeding.

"I'm not sure why everybody is here, but this is a court of law," Stephens said at the outset. "This is my court ... If anybody thought this was a public forum in which anybody could stand and speak, that is not going to be allowed. I will put you in jail. If you stay, you have to abide by my rules."

The activists will be back. They’ll keep trying.

The rest of us are going to have to do a lot of speaking up for justice. In a post tomorrow, I’ll share some ideas about what we can do here in Durham and North Carolina.

Full disclosure: I’m mostly retired now. Except as a prospective juror, I don’t expect to ever appear in Stephens’ court.

And even if I were to appear again as an expert witness, this post will count for nothing with Ron Stephens, which is another reason why I admire him.

Duke lacrosse: Is the Charlotte Observer “unbiased and informative?”

Charlotte Observer news editors claim their Duke lacrosse reporting is "unbiased and informative.”

With that in mind, let’s look at the Observer’s May 19 online story:

Judge: No fast track for Duke rape trial

It begins:

Duke University lacrosse player Reade Seligmann strolled past a heckler who called him a rapist Thursday to appear in court on sexual assault charges involving an exotic dancer.

”Strolled past a heckler?”

C’mon, "strolled” means an easy, relaxing walk.

The Observer knows that wasn’t the walk Reade Seligmann endured Thursday.

The Observer also knows, but didn’t tell readers, that Seligmann’s walk wasn’t just “past a heckler who called him a rapist.”

Seligmann had to walk past a crowd shouting threats identical to those we’ve read about in our history books.

Remember “Justice will be done, rapist?”

In school we learned that identical threat and others like it were used in the past to target mostly young black males, but sometimes young white males as well: Leo Frank, for example.

So when “Justice will be done, rapist,” was shouted repeatedly at Seligmann you might reasonable have thought the Observer would have reported it.

Other news organizations did, and included the fact that the threats were made my members of the New Black Panther Party.

But the “unbiased and informative” Observer didn’t.

Instead it changed “Justice will be done, rapist” to “a heckler who called him a rapist.”

Why?

I don’t know except that a lot of liberal journalists are now acting just like those journalists of old we’ve been told “helped create the climate of hate in which it happened.”

Final word: If you’re saying to yourself, “John’s only mentioned the article's first sentence.Perhaps further along the Observer mentions 'threats,' the Black Panthers, etc.”

That's reasonable enough, but the Observer doesn’t.

You can read its entire article here.

McCain’s New School speech and JinC advice for next year.

On May 6 I posted on the New School’s President’s invitation to Senator John McCain, a former POW and war hero, to be this year’s commencement speaker.

When liberals and leftists who dominate the New School learned of the invitation they immediatly ceased dialoguing about “tolerance” and “inclusion” to demand McCain be barred from speaking.

You see, Castro, Chavez, Ward Churchill – they’re “heroes” the New School would welcome.

But Sen. McCain? One New School scholar called him “a homopohobic (sic) bigot, just like the rest of them.”

Well, anyway, did McCain ever get to speak? And, if so, how’d it go?

From today’s New York Times:

Graduates at New School Heckle Speech by McCain

The jeers, boos and insults flew, as caustic as any that angry New Yorkers have hurled inside Madison Square Garden.
The objects of derision yesterday, however, were not the hapless New York Knicks, but Senator John McCain, the keynote speaker at the New School graduation, and his host, Bob Kerrey, the university president. […]

Faculty and students waved orange banners declaring: "Our commencement is not your platform." Many other students and faculty members waved orange fliers with the same message.

Further on the Times reported:

As Mr. McCain came to the lectern, dozens of students and professors stood and turned their backs on him. Many waved their fliers. […]

After yesterday's event, Mr. McCain told reporters he felt "fine" about his reception. "I feel sorry for people living in a dull world where they can't listen to the views of others," he said.

The New School audience’s effort to suppress McCain’s speech is one more instance of a thuggish intolerance for diversity that we see more and more of on the left.

The choice of orange to represent speech suppressors is ironic. Most of us associate orange with the Ukraine’s recent drive for independence and greater tolerance for political diversity.

The New School’s early faculty members, many of whom fled Germany in the late 20s and early 30s, would have thought brown a more appropriate color for speech suppressors. Faculty who later joined them after fleeing the Soviet Evil Empire would no doubt have thought red was also appropriate.

Advice to the New School:

If you’re going to suppress speech at next year’s graduation, go with either brown or red.

My guess is red will be more popular with the faculty and student body, but both colors are equally appropriate.