text:
Posted by Mark Paredes
Intolerance and the moral myopia of leaders in the black community were on display today in Maryland, where the head of the NAACP held a press conference to declare with a straight face that the state's proposed gay marriage law means that "every church, every house of worship, every synagogue in the state can have faith that everything will be respected and protected not only by the U.S. Constitution but by Question 6 [the proposed law] itself." Benjamin Jealous went on to assure "people of faith" that "this isn't about any one religious belief. It's about protecting the civil right to make a lifelong commitment to the person you love." The Reverend Dr. Todd Yeary, a local African-American pastor, went so far as to proclaim that "[t]his really is not a religious issue. The wording of Question 6 is very specific in accepting religious protections. All persons can honor their own personal convictions without imposing them on anyone else."
These soaring words were undoubtedly of small comfort to Dr. Angela McCaskill, the African-American Chief Diversity Officer at Gallaudet University – a federally chartered university, I might add -- who was placed on leave this week for signing a petition last summer in support of a referendum to challenge Maryland's gay marriage law, which was passed earlier this year by the state legislature. She signed the petition after hearing a sermon at church encouraging congregants to support traditional marriage. Dr. McCaskill is a remarkable woman: She was the first deaf African-American woman to earn a doctorate at Gallaudet, and has worked at the university for 23 years. To see her placed on leave by a Jewish university president (!) for exercising a constitutional right is inconceivable to me.
Top LDS Church leaders have indicated in recent years that they are primarily interested in engaging with leaders of other faiths in two areas: 1) Tikkun olam projects, including humanitarian aid; 2) Religious freedom. The Gallaudet debacle makes it easy to see why the latter issue is so important. True to form, the NAACP leaders turned their backs on Dr. McCaskill, preferring to chant the same tired mantras about religious liberty that voters across the land have rejected. While it's true that the plain language of Question 6 states clearly that churches and pastors will be free to reject gay marriage, the persecution of traditional marriage advocates demonstrated to anyone willing to see that elegant ballot language is powerless to stop the witch-hunts carried out by gay marriage extremists.
If Dr. McCaskill had discriminated against LGBT students or faculty members on campus, the university would have been more than justified in removing her from her post. However, no allegations of prejudice on her part have surfaced. Her only sin seems to have been a desire to put gay marriage on the ballot so Marylanders can vote on it. She is scheduled to speak out publicly this week on the issue of gay marriage, and I'm sure that enormous pressure will be put on her to issue a mea maxima culpa statement apologizing for the hurt that her actions may have caused gay marriage fanatics. When the Forces of Tolerance went after my job in the wake of the passage of Proposition 8 in California, a principled gay rabbi opposed their efforts. His assistance, combined with the steadfast refusal of my bosses to discipline me for expressing an opinion, saved my job. It would be a shame if the efforts of decent people on both sides of the issue don't manage to save Dr. McCaskill's.
Of course, outrageous actions like the humiliation of Dr. McCaskill don't help the cause of gay marriage, so this may turn out for the best. Most thoughtful people remember how we were had by the gay rights activists of the 90s, who used our support to get long-overdue gay rights statutes on the books, then used them to pummel organizations like the Boy Scouts. Instead of making serious arguments, they try to convince the gullible that people who like marriage just the way it is (and has been for millennia) are haters and bigots who need to be silenced. That the most recent victim of their campaign of intolerance is an accomplished African-American woman who has helped deaf students for decades should cause them to hang their heads in shame. I can't believe that most gays support this action. If Marylanders are smart, they'll reject this campaign of intimidation supported by extremists and impotent black leaders by voting to keep traditional marriage on November 6th.
I will be making presentations on Mormonism in Los Angeles at Sinai Temple (dialogue with Rabbi David Wolpe, Oct 18th @ 7:30 p.m.) and Temple Isaiah (dialogue with Rabbi Zoë Klein, Oct 24th @ 6:00 p.m.). The public is invited.
12.3.13 at 12:19 am | It's a bad idea because Judaism is important
11.21.13 at 11:23 pm | While everyone knows that Jews can say who's a. . .
11.4.13 at 10:43 pm | Greater expectations need to be placed on Jews,. . .
10.18.13 at 11:26 pm | My friend Brian offers an eloquent explanation of. . .
10.13.13 at 11:28 pm | The title says it all
9.30.13 at 11:32 pm | The Santa Monica Daily Press missed the mark in. . .
9.9.12 at 9:30 pm | When it comes to the Book of Mormon, I'll stick. . . (57)
6.5.12 at 11:26 pm | Marlena Tanya Muchnick, a Jewish convert to. . . (43)
11.18.10 at 12:47 am | A monument to the prophet in Israel is an idea. . . (34)
October 10, 2012 | 2:02 pm
Posted by Mark Paredes
There are statements in our literature by the early Brethren that we have interpreted to mean that the Negroes would not receive the priesthood in mortality. I have said the same things, and people write me letters and say, "You said such and such, and how is it now that we do such and such?" All I can say is that it is time disbelieving people repented and got in line and believed in a living, modern prophet. Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or George Q. Cannon or whoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.
It doesn't make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June 1978. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them. We now do what meridian Israel did when the Lord said the gospel should go to the Gentiles. We forget all the statements that limited the gospel to the house of Israel, and we start going to the Gentiles. -- Bruce R. McKonkie (Mormon apostle)
I was contacted recently by a foreign journalist who wanted to know why all of Mitt Romney's senior advisors and staff members were white. Was it part of a general Mormon insensitivity to blacks and other minorities, she wondered? Or evidence of personal prejudices he secretly harbors? While I admitted that all of the people I know who are working on Mitt's campaign are white, I expressed considerable doubt that this was a reflection of racial bigotry or prejudice. I then referred her to Mitt's campaign for further comment, since I am not affiliated in any way with Romney's White House run. Upon further reflection, I realized that her questions reflected popular perceptions of the LDS Church and blacks in this country that may not be accurate. It is with a little trepidation that I now address the issue of blacks and the LDS priesthood, one which has had a profound effect on my own life.
The first Mormon prophet in modern times, Joseph Smith, made no racial distinctions among members. Several black men were ordained to the priesthood during his lifetime, and towards the end of his life he held abolitionist views. In fact, his platform in the U.S. presidential election of 1844 called for the freeing of slaves by 1850 through the sale of public lands.
Smith's successor, Brigham Young, brought the Saints to Utah and established a theocracy. Mormons believe that all prophets, ancient or modern, are called to do certain things upon the earth, and that this "American Moses" led his people to the Intermountain West under divine inspiration. Indeed, Brigham Young's sole contribution to the LDS scriptural canon is a revelation (Doctrine and Covenants 136) on how to organize the Saints for the westward trek.
Like most people throughout history, Brigham Young held contemporary views on race, views that my readers and I might find repugnant. As early as 1849, he stated his belief that Cain's seed were cursed with blackness and with a denial of the priesthood. This belief was institutionalized following Young's address to a joint session of the Utah Territorial Legislature on February 5, 1852, in which he declared as a church doctrine ("true eternal principles the Lord Almighty has ordained") the principle of denial of the priesthood to blacks, together with any governing role in a secular government or civil society. That same year the Utah legislature passed a law permitting slavery in the territory. The prohibition on blacks' ordination to the priesthood remained in effect until 1978, when church leaders lifted the ban.
How, you may ask, can any intelligent Mormon accept this? Several theological principles are applicable here. First of all, there is certainly precedent in scripture for denial of the priesthood and other privileges to ethnic groups based entirely on their lineage. According to the Hebrew Bible, the only men on earth who could be ordained as priests were the direct descendants of Aaron, who just happened to be Moses's brother. I'm sure that many Israelite tongues were wagging centuries ago about nepotism and favoritism when it came to the priesthood, but for those of us who take the Bible literally, we have to accept that this was somehow God's will. No detailed explanation is given in the Torah for this restriction. In addition, the New Testament teaches that the preaching of the Christian Gospel was restricted to Jews during the life of Jesus. It wasn't until after his death that Peter, the head of the church, had a dream that authorized him to take his message to Gentiles as well. It is this latter prohibition, a temporary one, that most closely approximates the LDS temporary prohibition on blacks and the priesthood.
Second, if one buys the assertion of irreligious pundits like Bill Maher and Lawrence O'Donnell that the ban was enacted by a racist church, then one has to conclude that eleven presidents of the church – Brigham Young, John Taylor, Wilford Woodruff, Lorenzo Snow, Joseph F. Smith, Heber J. Grant, George Albert Smith, David O. McKay, Joseph Fielding Smith, Harold B. Lee, and Spencer W. Kimball (the latter at least until 1978)– were a cabal of white supremacists acting to keep the proverbial black man down. Since the president/prophet is the presiding high priest in the church and has the final say in matters of the priesthood, the Maher crowd has to believe that these men, known for their decades of selfless service to people around the world, denied the priesthood to blacks just for the heck of it.
It is impossible for any believing Mormon to buy this. As with many things relating to the priesthood, the reason has to do with Elijah. When his time on earth drew to a close, his disciple Elisha asked if he could receive a double portion of his spirit (2 Kings 2:9). Elijah doesn't promise him anything, but says that if Elisha witnesses his ascension to heaven, he will receive his mantle (2 Kings 2:10). In other words, the decision was God's, not his. For Mormons, this means that no prophet, no matter how great, has the authority to manipulate the priesthood according to his own personal desires. The priesthood is God's, and He directs how His church will use it to help mankind. Any Mormon who claims that the priesthood ban was a product of racism, not revelation, has to assert at the same time that God is not guiding our prophets.
It is true that Brigham Young and two other Church presidents (John Taylor and Joseph Fielding Smith) made what we would consider to be anti-black statements, and that other Church leaders have made objectionable statements on race. However, none of these statements is doctrinal in nature. Only three official statements on this issue have been issued by top church officials. The first, dated August 17, 1949, asserted that the temporary denial of the priesthood ("at the present time") was a direct commandment from God. It also quoted another church president as stating that "The day will come when all that race will be redeemed and possess all the blessings which we now have." It ended by pointing to our pre-earth life as the origin of the priesthood ban.
In 1969, top church leaders issued a statement on the "Rights of the Negro" that expressed support for the constitutional rights of blacks and their status as children of a common God and common parents Adam and Eve. [Indeed, the oft-repeated notion that Mormons believe that blacks don't have souls is utter nonsense]. At the same time, it affirmed the priesthood ban, which was enacted "for reasons which we believe are known to God, but which He has not made fully known to man." The prophet at the time, David O. McKay, stated: "The seeming discrimination by the Church toward the Negro is not something which originated with man; but goes back into the beginning with God....Revelation assures us that this plan antedates man's mortal existence, extending back to man's pre-existent state." President McKay added, hopefully, "Sometime in God's eternal plan, the Negro will be given the right to hold the priesthood."
The third official statement was the 1978 announcement of the lifting of the priesthood ban. It came just in time for me. My mother had joined the church, but refused to let her kids be baptized until the church did something about the ban. She didn't want to have to explain to her biracial son why all of the other boys in his age group at church were getting ordained as deacons, but he wasn't. Our LDS neighbor came running over to our house that June day in 1978, and my life changed forever. A few months later I was baptized, and I was ordained a deacon the next year.
Any group of 14 million people is bound to have some bigots in it, and the LDS Church is no exception. Years ago, a stake president (regional leader) told me to my face over dinner – and in front of his family -- that he was uncomfortable having his daughter date me because "in our country we don't like black people." [I will always attribute his unexpected, premature release as stake president a week later to instant divine karma]. An area seventy (regional leader) in this country who knew of my ethnic background told me to my face – this time over lunch – that he firmly opposed interracial dating and marriage. [His position softened considerably after his son married outside of his race to a wonderful girl]. Do I agree with their views? Of course not. Do I think that they represent those of most Mormons? No way. However, I also don't think that their benighted views on race wipe out the many years of devoted service that both men have rendered to their families, communities, and church. I put their views in the same category as those that were condemned by Elder Bruce R. McKonkie in the quote that opens this essay, and on a personal level I regard people like this much as I would a kindly grandmother who holds antiquated views on contemporary issues.
Why were blacks denied the priesthood for 120 years? For most Mormons, the answer is: Who cares? After all, the LDS Church has 350,000 members and 1,000 congregations in Africa (the church's fastest-growing region), 1.2 million members and 2,000 congregations in multiracial Brazil, and many black members in the Caribbean, Central and South America, and the United States. In an earlier blog post, I profiled a black Mormon who was running for the presidency of Mali. Would I like to see a black apostle or prophet someday? You bet. Does the LDS Church need to apologize once and for all for the ban? Honestly, I don't see how it can. I've already outlined how any explanation other than revelation to prophets doesn't make sense from an LDS theological perspective, and church leaders are not in the business of apologizing for implementing God's will, however incomprehensible it may be to contemporary non-Mormons.
I once asked a black LDS bishop what he thought of the priesthood ban. He told me that he was so busy doing what God wanted him to do that he didn't have time to speculate on the past. Prior to leaving on my mission, I prayed specifically about this issue. I didn't feel that I could represent the church until I had a personal witness that it had done what God had wanted with respect to blacks and the priesthood. My answer? Let's just say that a few months later, I was on the streets of Sicily wearing a name tag.
I will be making presentations on Mormonism in Los Angeles at Sinai Temple (dialogue with Rabbi David Wolpe, Oct 18th @ 7:30 p.m.) and Temple Isaiah (dialogue with Rabbi Zoë Klein, Oct 24th @ 6:00 p.m.). The public is invited.
October 1, 2012 | 11:14 pm
Posted by Mark Paredes
While I was single, I often found myself wondering whether it would be better to remain a faithful Mormon bachelor all of my life or to marry a wonderful non-Mormon girl. I had a few opportunities to do so, and in moments of frustration I almost regretted not having pursued them instead of holding out for a temple marriage, the goal of every Latter-day Saint. By the grace of God, I was able to marry an angel in the Los Angeles Temple earlier this year, but I have never forgotten what it was like to be a single Latter-day Saint who prayed for years to find a spouse.
It was therefore with particular interest that I read this week's article in the Jewish Journal announcing Reform Rabbi John Rosove's decision to begin officiating at interfaith weddings. Interfaith marriages in the Jewish community have long fascinated me, since they are one of the few things that can bring together rabbis from all major movements in opposition. Since non-Mormons are not permitted to be married to church members in LDS temples, my regular Jewish readers would probably expect me to agree with those rabbis who refuse to perform interfaith marriages. While they are obviously free to adopt whatever policies they choose on such marriages, if I were a rabbi I would conduct wedding ceremonies for any Jew who agreed to live as a Jew and to raise his/her children in the faith.
There are interesting similarities between LDS temple marriages and Jewish wedding ceremonies: Mormons are sealed together for eternity according to the Abrahamic covenant, Jews are married in accordance with the laws of Moses and Israel, and the ideal marriage in both communities involves pairing with someone of the same faith and observance level. That said, LDS ecclesiastical leaders can and do perform interfaith marriages outside of temples that are valid for this life only – "till death do you part." The idea is that if church members choose not to marry in the temple, at least they can have an LDS chapel and a church leader play a role on their special day. With any luck, the Mormons members of the interfaith couples will continue to remain active members of the church, raise their children as Mormons, and possibly convert their spouses.
I've had several conversations over the years with rabbis on this issue, and have come to the conclusion that those rabbis who focus more on the welfare of Klal Yisrael (i.e., the Jews as a people) do not perform interfaith weddings, while those who are more concerned with individual Jews do. Like Jews, Mormons actively encourage their members to marry each other in an effort to strengthen their community. However, if a Mormon decides to marry a non-member, Mormon leaders would try to honor that person's choice by counseling with the couple, performing the marriage ceremony, and actively encouraging the newlyweds to make the church a part of their family's life. Kudos to Rabbi Rosove for reaching a similar conclusion within his faith tradition.
I will be making presentations on Mormonism in Los Angeles at Sinai Temple (dialogue with Rabbi David Wolpe, Oct 18th @ 7:30 p.m.) and Temple Isaiah (dialogue with Rabbi Zoë Klein, Oct 24th @ 6:00 p.m.). The public is invited.
September 28, 2012 | 9:34 pm
Posted by Mark Paredes
In a conference call with reporters two days ago, LDS Sen. Harry Reid delivered himself of the opinion that Mitt Romney had "sullied" the Mormon faith, saying that Romney "is not the face of Mormonism." He may not be, but there's no doubt that Sen. Reid was the face of chutzpah this week.
Let's look at Reid's LDS bona fides for a moment. He's a Mormon senator who is the point man for the gambling industry in Washington, who has publicly criticized top LDS Church leaders -- whom he regards as prophets -- for their position on gay marriage, and who recently slandered Mitt Romney by falsely claiming that he hadn't paid taxes. This is the guy who gets to determine who the face of Mormonism is?
In his ill-considered comments, Reid expressed support for Gregory Prince, an LDS historian who wrote that Romney had "sullied the religion that he and I share" after hearing of his infamous "47%" speech to supporters. Prince apparently believes that the religious injunction for Mormons to "take care of the poor and needy throughout the world" requires Mormons to support liberal government programs that have failed to lift people out of poverty for nearly five decades. If he wants to support such programs, he's welcome to do so. However, I dearly wish that he'd keep our religion out of this discussion.
While Mormons believe, along with Jews and other Christians, that God wants us to take care of the poor and the needy, there is nothing in our theology that requires us to use government programs to do so. Mormons have an individual obligation to help others, but no verse of scripture that I'm aware of enjoins us to take money from one group of people in order to help another. Self-reliance, not handouts, is at the heart of the LDS Church's welfare program. Mitt Romney spent many years of his life helping the poor and needy while serving in various ecclesiastical positions, and I doubt that he needs lectures from a historian on what his religion requires of him. Again, if Prince feels that government programs are the best way to help the poor, he's welcome to advocate for them. However, I resent very much his inference that Mormons who disagree with him care less about the poor or are not as devoted to their faith.
Harry Reid would have more credibility in the mainstream LDS community if he spent more time studying the doctrines of our faith (e.g., sustaining and supporting prophets) and less time practicing liberalism, the faith that appears to command his prime loyalty. As for Dr. Prince, one hopes it is not too much to ask that he stop conflating his political views with normative Mormonism and/or anathematizing those who disagree with him. If Mitt Romney is not the face of contemporary Mormonism, at least he is far more representative of it than Messrs. Reid and Prince.
September 24, 2012 | 7:36 pm
Posted by Mark Paredes
Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your God which I command you. – Deuteronomy 4:2
I thought of blogging on the LDS concept of atonement during Yom Kippur week, but given the centrality of Jesus to any such discussion, I decided to defer to Jewish sensibilities and focus on the Torah instead. My inspiration for this essay came via an email from a Jewish reader who wanted to know in what way modern LDS prophets contribute to Torah interpretation. It's one of the best questions I've ever been asked, and it allows me to highlight one significant way in which Jews and Mormons approach scripture from different perspectives.
When reading the Bible, I use a standard Hebrew text and the English-language King James Version (KJV), which is the official Bible of the LDS Church and many Protestant churches. The LDS edition of the KJV, in turn, contains many excerpts from the Joseph Smith Translation (JST) of the Bible. Joseph Smith was the first modern Mormon prophet, and he spent years working on the JST (also called the Inspired Version) in order to clarify certain doctrines and offer interesting inspired insights into scripture. The JST was incomplete at the time of his Joseph Smith's death in 1844. While the JST is not the official Bible of the LDS Church, the translation does offer many interesting biblical insights for Mormons. Here are a few well-known passages in the Torah that are interpreted differently by Mormons:
1) The hardening of Pharaoh's heart. In traditional translations of the Book of Exodus (or Shemot, if you prefer), we read that on many occasions God hardened Pharaoh's heart so that he wouldn't let the Israelites leave Egypt, then punished Pharaoh with additional plagues for his stubbornness. By way of contrast, in the JST every mention of the divine hardening of the pharaonic heart is changed to "and Pharaoh hardened his heart." As a result, Mormons believe that Pharaoh hardened his own heart after each plague, making his punishments more just according to our view of a fair God. Whether Mormons have an even more negative image of the biblical Pharaoh than Jews as a result of this JST insight would be an interesting topic for Jewish-LDS discussion groups.
2) Lot's bizarre proposal to the men of Sodom. In the traditional rendering of the 18th chapter of Genesis, Abraham's nephew Lot plays host to two (the JST says three) angels in Sodom. The wicked men of the town encircle Lot's house and demand that he produce his guests so that they can "know" them in a carnal way. A gracious host but terrible father, Lot pleads with the men to have his two virgin daughters instead of the men. In the JST's version of Lot's speech to the men of Sodom, he comes off as a protective father who had no intention of betraying his daughters: "Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, plead with my brethren that I may not bring them out unto you; and ye shall not do unto them as seemeth good in your eyes; For God will not justify his servant in this thing."
3) Noah's selfishness. In Genesis we read that God decided to destroy all flesh on the earth, so He called on a just, righteous man named Noah to build an ark for himself and his family so that they could survive the flood. There is no mention in the Torah of Noah's efforts to warn others of the dangers to come. In the JST, Mormons read that Noah and his sons "prophesied, and taught the things of God" and "called upon the children of men that they should repent," all while their lives were being threatened. We also read in the JST that it repented Noah, not the Lord (as stated in Genesis 6:6), that man had been created on the earth.
4) Alas, the JST was published too late for the residents of colonial Salem, but Mormons believe that it was murderers, not witches, who deserved the death penalty as required in Exodus 22:18 ("Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live," changed in the JST to "Thou shalt not suffer a murderer to live").
5) While most Mormons would probably join with Jewish thinkers like Dennis Prager in praising the Torah requirement that true justice requires that the poor not be privileged in their disputes (Exodus 23:3 – "Neither shalt thou countenance a poor man in his cause"), the JST substitutes "wicked" for "poor" in this verse, clarifying for Mormons the need to prevent the wicked from prevailing. I'm sure that Jews would agree with this sentiment, if not with the change itself.
Mormons believe that the Hebrew Bible is God's word as far as it has been translated correctly and preserved throughout the centuries, and we view the Torah as an inspired spiritual and secular history of ancient Israel. In addition, like the ancient Israelites, we rely on modern-day prophets to interpret scriptures authoritatively for us. As the Jewish world begins the reading of the Torah once again this month, I wish all of my Jewish readers a chatimah tova in the book of life for the coming year.
I will be making presentations on Mormonism in Los Angeles at Sinai Temple (dialogue with Rabbi David Wolpe, Oct 18th @ 7:30 p.m.) and Temple Isaiah (dialogue with Rabbi Zoë Klein, Oct 24th @ 6:00 p.m.). The public is invited.
September 13, 2012 | 10:53 pm
Posted by Mark Paredes
I rarely write about politics in this space, but I feel the need to weigh in on the recent violence in Egypt and Libya. As a former U.S. diplomat in the Middle East, I was very disappointed to read Mitt Romney's ill-timed and ill-considered comments during Tuesday's attacks on U.S. diplomatic missions by raging mobs in Cairo and Benghazi. His appalling lack of judgment and chest-thumping approach to diplomacy in the region and around the world have understandably raised questions about Mitt's temperament and judgment when it comes to foreign policy.
First of all, Mitt's target was way off. While a hostile crowd was gathering nearby and threatening to storm its gates, the U.S. Embassy in Cairo issued a brief statement on Tuesday condemning a silly anti-Muslim video made in California that had been widely viewed and condemned in Egypt. The embassy's purpose in issuing the statement was obviously to calm things down and prevent an attack; not, as Mitt asserted, to express "sympathy" with the attackers. Equally puzzling was his statement that we need not apologize for American "values." Since when is producing anti-Muslim videos an American value? You can respect the First Amendment all you want, but there's no need to go to bat for an Islamophobic idiot – especially one whose bigotry has resulted in deadly violence.
I can't remember the last time that a serious politician took advantage of a tragedy in the Middle East to bash a sitting president. As The Atlantic magazine points out, when Pres. Carter's mission to rescue the Iranian hostages failed spectacularly, then-candidate Ronald Reagan had this to say: "This is the time for us as a nation and a people to stand united." George H.W. Bush, campaigning at the time for the Republican nomination, also expressed his support: "I unequivocally support the president of the United States -- no ifs, ands or buts -- and it certainly is not a time to try to go one-up politically. He made a difficult, courageous decision." Similar comments would have made Mitt look more astute – and presidential.
History shows that angry fanatics in the Middle East are no respecters of politicians or political parties. Terrorists blew up the American embassy and Marine barracks in Beirut on President Reagan's watch, and they blew up two American embassies during the Clinton administration. Moreover, presidents from both parties have been trying for decades to bring about a comprehensive peace in the region. They weren't able to do it, and I'm betting that Mitt won't be any more successful. The U.S. has been unpopular in the region for a long time, and it's hard to see how a President Romney will change that dynamic.
Mitt's aggressive approach to diplomacy is the one aspect of his candidacy that gives me pause. When it comes to campaigning versus governing, where a politician stands depends on where he sits. Earlier this year the former governor promised to get tough with China on trade. The truth is, as former Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman explained, that once he's in office Mitt would have to negotiate and compromise with Chinese leaders, just as his predecessors have done for 40 years. Ditto for his harsh stance on Russia. Sooner or later, a President Romney would have to meet with Putin and try to reach an accommodation with him. Granted, President Obama's reset approach hasn't worked, but I'm not too sure that the general proposals outlined on the Romney campaign's official website will, either. For now, all we hear is that we need "American leadership" abroad. No one doubts that, but without specifics, it's hard to judge whether Mitt's policies will be any more effective than Obama's have been. What would Mitt have done differently in Egypt? Syria? Libya? If the proposals outlined on his campaign website are any indication, the answer is "not much."
When it comes to foreign policy, the Romney campaign is long on posturing and short on specific proposals for engaging with the world and solving its problems. General criticism of Obama's foreign policy is to be expected, but is it too much to ask for Mitt to project a presidential demeanor when tragedy strikes abroad? Mitt still has my vote, but I do wish that he had kept his powder dry on this one.
I will be making presentations on Mormonism in Los Angeles at Sinai Temple (dialogue with Rabbi David Wolpe, Oct 18th @ 7:30 p.m.) and Temple Isaiah (dialogue with Rabbi Zoë Klein, Oct 24th @ 6:00 p.m.). The public is invited.
September 9, 2012 | 9:30 pm
Posted by Mark Paredes
Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! – Isaiah 5:20, 2 Nephi 15:20 (Book of Mormon)
AY! My name is Joseph Smith, and I'm going to f*** this baby! – verse from the song "Joseph Smith, American Moses" in The Book of Mormon musical
One of the Jewish community's many virtues is its expression of righteous indignation. Whenever anti-Semitism rears its ugly head in the public square, you can bet that organizations like the ADL and AJC, as well as prominent rabbis and other leaders, will confront it and denounce it. Jews are well-known for their self-deprecating sense of humor, and are better than anyone else at laughing at themselves, their religion, and their culture. When non-Jews attempt to poke fun at them, Jews generally laugh along with them as long as the humor is in good taste. Mormons also tend to be thick-skinned, and are usually good-natured when their beliefs become fodder for jokes. However, judging from their reaction to the vulgar, anti-Mormon musical The Book of Mormon, Mormons do not yet feel comfortable expressing righteous indignation in public, even when it is obviously warranted.
Since I do not plan to see the musical, I researched the songs and storyline before writing this essay. I'm not easily offended, but I was appalled at the vulgarity and at the way in which anti-Mormonism makes even racism palatable. Try to imagine the opening night for a musical parody that depicts Africans as AIDS-infected, misogynistic villagers who sing a song ("Hasa Diga Eebowai," a parody of "Hakuna Matata" from Lion King) whose title translates to "F*** you, God." There would be protests up and down Broadway, and the musical's run would be pretty short. However, if you add Mormon missionaries to the mix and use this outrageous depiction to skewer Mormonism, suddenly it becomes acceptable, even laudable.
Two things are obvious from even a cursory review of the musical: Its creators hate religion, and they hate Mormonism. No one with any respect for the sacred or the divine would write lyrics like "F*** you God in the a**, mouth, and c***." There is no context in which this is anything less than religious pornography. Adding a catchy tune and voices to this smut doesn't change anything. Ditto for a schmaltzy, predictable ending.
Unsurprisingly, the musical's creators are all hostile to religion. Trey Parker believes all religions are silly: "All the religions are superfunny to me......The story of Jesus makes no sense to me. God sent his only son. Why could God only have one son and why would he have to die? It's just bad writing, really." Matt Stone, though ethnically Jewish, is an atheist. Here's Robert Lopez's insightful take on LDS beliefs: "The reason why we both wanted to do Mormonism from the beginning is that we all felt that way about religion. There is something supremely, ridiculously fake about it, but it helps people live their lives better, and there is something emotionally true about it … But you don't think God talked to this guy and had him bury some plates in the ground, that's ridiculous. But if believing in a goofy story helps a bunch of people lead lives in a meaningful way, then it is true, and that's where we started from."
What is incomprehensible to me on a personal level is to read comments from a few Mormons who have seen the show and find positive things to say about it. When I worked in the Jewish community, I was always disappointed to see Jews serve as spokesmen for groups and organizations that actively worked against Israel and the Jewish people (e.g., BDS groups). They are referred to in some Jewish circles as "self-hating Jews," a term I always recoiled at. I could never bring myself to use it, because I never experienced the visceral reaction that those who used the term did upon seeing fellow members of the tribe behave in such a disgraceful way. When I see these Mormon mouthpieces praise a blasphemous, sacrilegious, vulgar show that is hostile to their faith, I get it; Like my Jewish friends, I experience a total disconnect. I have no idea where these people are coming from, or why they would want to support the efforts of people who hate their religion. All of us want to be liked and accepted by others, but sometimes it's important to be in, not of, the world.
A word of explanation is probably necessary here: I am not a vulgar person, I do not swear, and I included the original lyrics above (albeit with asterisks) only after long deliberation on my part. I apologize to anyone who is offended by them, but in the end I thought that it was necessary to include the original words in order to make my point.
Like most Mormons, I do have a healthy sense of humor in the religion department, and am happy to laugh at the latest polygamy jokes. I am also pleased that my church has chosen to take the high road by paying for ads pushing the real Book of Mormon in the musical's playbill. However, as they say in Hebrew, yesh gvul (there's a limit). I dearly wish that there were a Mormon ADL right now to point out that Mormon-bashing (as a subset of Christian-bashing) remains the only acceptable prejudice in this country. If there are any Jewish readers who want me to lighten up, imagine Moses delivering the Joseph Smith line cited above in a Broadway musical entitled "The Torah." Not so funny now, is it?
To be clear, I can understand why Mormons want to go to the musical. They may be curious, they may think it's only a little risqué, or they may think that a show that's won 9 Tonys must be worth seeing. I am genuinely baffled, however, by my coreligionists who come away from the show with good things to say about it. Thankfully, their numbers are few. I'm more than willing to laugh at LDS culture with people who do so in good taste and with at least a modicum of respect, but as for The Book of Mormon, I'll stick to the original.
I will be making presentations on Mormonism in Los Angeles at Sinai Temple (dialogue with Rabbi David Wolpe, Oct 18th @ 7:30 p.m.) and Temple Isaiah (dialogue with Rabbi Zoë Klein, Oct 24th @ 6:00 p.m.). The public is invited.
September 2, 2012 | 10:29 pm
Posted by Mark Paredes
As the Jewish New Year begins later this month, I will join Jews in reflecting on beginnings. I was married earlier this year, and celebrate my birthday on the first day of Rosh Hashanah. Since neither Rosh Hashanah nor my temple wedding would have been possible without the covenant that God made with Abraham, I can't think of a better time to give an overview of the LDS concept of the Abrahamic covenant and its centrality in our theology.
Many Christian churches believe in supersessionism (so-called "replacement theology"), which holds that the Christian churches have replaced Israel in God's plan, that Jews are no longer God's chosen people, and that the Abrahamic Covenant has been fulfilled in Christianity. What do Mormons have to say about these beliefs?
It is an article of our faith that other Christian churches do not have divine authorization to "replace" anything, let alone the Jewish people. If you ask a Mormon to join a debate on supersessionism, don't be surprised if he declines. Claims that Israelites (including Jews) no longer have a covenant with God or that they have been replaced by modern Christian churches are non-starters for us.
For Mormons, the Abrahamic covenant is as valid today as it was on the day that God gave it to the biblical patriarch. However, we don't believe that the covenant is restricted to Jews. Anciently the covenant was extended to all Israelites, and Latter-day Saints believe that everyone who is accepts the gospel of Jesus Christ and is baptized into our church becomes a child of Abraham and therefore a covenant Israelite.
The last belief – that the Abrahamic covenant has been fulfilled in Christianity – requires a much more nuanced answer. Compared to Judaism, LDS theology posits an expanded definition of the Abrahamic covenant. For Jews, the only affirmative obligation listed in the Torah in order to receive the blessings promised to Abraham is to circumcise their newborn boys (though Moses certainly lengthened the list). For Latter-day Saints, the covenant involves the higher priesthood and related covenants (including eternal marriage) that Abraham received.
The covenant also requires us to engage in missionary work in order to encourage people worldwide to take upon themselves the name of the Lord (indeed, Jews at one time were the most aggressive missionaries in the world). So the next time you see Mormon missionaries on the street, remind yourself that they are fulfilling what they understand to be their obligations under the Abrahamic covenant.
In other words, the question for Mormons is not whether the Abrahamic covenant still applies to Jews, the descendants of the ancient Israelites (it does). The question for us is whether Jews (or Mormons, for that matter) are keeping the terms of the covenant. Given the LDS understanding of the covenant that God made with Abraham, it can find its fullest expression only through the higher priesthood and temple ordinances.
While Mormons and Jews may differ on the scope of the Abrahamic covenant, we definitely agree that it is as valid today as it was during Abraham's lifetime. It helps to define us as a people and to inspire us to honor God in all that we do. Circumcision for Jews, and priesthood ordinances for Mormons, help to remind us of who we are and Whom we serve. As I blow out my birthday candles on Rosh Hashanah, I plan to make a special wish that the names of Abraham and his God will be honored to a greater extent throughout the world in the coming year.
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010


text:
have a cresselia and many others lookin for shiny totodile
have a cresselia and many others lookin for shiny totodile
and dialga,shiny darkrai
(i dont have heatran or cresselia anymore)
Looking For: english shiny shuckle and either shiny or normal lugia pm me back please
My shinies:
Pokemon Pearl Code: 0003 5116 5211
Have Cresselia for trade. Looking for fateful HG Kyogre, SS Enigma stone Latias.
EDIT: Traded
Last edited by raykee247; 20th September 2011 at 8:05 PM.
Sometimes you're the windshield; sometimes you're the bug
Looking for:
(SS Enigma Stone Event), Soul Dew, , clones accepted
most breedables inc. evolved ones; More legendaries coming soon
All my legendaries are UT unless stated otherwise.
Willing to breed for egg moves on any pokemon (if reasonable request) but it may take awhile.
Need any Cresselia. PM me.
Soul Silver Friend Code: 4470-2804-7681
Have: (shiny)
looking for any legit english cresselia, willing to trade any pokemon gen I to IV, except legendaries, willling to breed also
pm if interested
Trade complete, Celebi traded
Last edited by skinny spartan; 2nd December 2011 at 3:57 AM.
Come at me broCurrent Shinies:
i'm tradin an ut cresselia i just caught in masterball lookin for a johto legend besides dogs
white fc:5028 6086 4498
soul silver fc: 4298 8231 5702
3ds fc: 4356 0302 3712
I have a UT lv 50 Cresselia for trade Modest nature.
Looking for Deoxys! but pm with offers
looking for a legit Cresselia to use on random wifi battles!
offering ALOT!
check out my sig!
Pokemon White FC: 1764 3866 9169
I Collect & Trade 100% LEGIT ONLY Shiny Pokemon.
I host LOTS of rare shiny pokemon! CHECK THEM OUT BELOW.
Also Dream World Pokemon (non shiny)
Egg Move!
Mach Punch/Drain Punch
Giga Drain/Leech Seed
Drain Punch/Fake Out
Dragon Dance
Rock Blast
Looking for a UT Bold Cresselia. If in gen 5, please make sure it knows the move Trick. If not, then it doesn't matter. Please PM me if you have one.
- I have officially claimed the awesome Helioptile -
~ Pokémon White Team ~ | ~ | ~ Pokémon White 2 Team ~ | ~ | ~ Pokémon Y Team ~
. . ~ | ~ ~ | ~
Friend Code: 2365 5104 6047 ~ | ~ Friend Code: 2624 0490 4722 ~ | ~ Friend Code: 1993 7426 4118
I have a Cresselia for trade. Pm with offer.
Looking for any cresselia on 4th gen. Have tons to offer. PM me with offer.
I've got a Japanese Cresselia . Looking for Zapdos , Phione / Manaphy ( Dex Entry Only ) .
Wanted: Shiny Speed or Attack Nature.
Many Pokemon to Offer and Trade.
TRU Arceus (Can Activate SS HG Event in Sinjoh Ruins)
Birth Island Deoxys UT
MYSTRY Mew
And Many More. (Too Lazy to Put it Here.)
My Friend Code Here:
[SPOILER=My Pokemon Teams] Spoiler:- -My ThunderStorm Team:
Have a shiny Cresselia-looking mainly for a shiny Regigigas, but just Pm your offer n_n
im looking for a cresslia not sure if i would have what you want but i will take a look if you can help please pm me
Have shiny cresselia, looking for shiny darkrai
My shinies
I also breed pokemon and if you need any just message me but I delete messages almost every day so I might forget about the trade. I can also give pokerus to any pokemon I trade to you.
Trade completed!
Last edited by EXGShadow; 30th September 2012 at 4:44 PM.
White 2 FC: 3311 2771 3038 / 3DS FC: 0044 3638 4020
Looking for:
-Lansat, Starf and Enigma berries;
-Burn Drive, Shock Drive;
-Hidden ability Pikachu.
Hi! I'm looking for a normal Cressalia. I'd prefer if it was Bold natured, but if you don't have one then it's fine.
I don't have too many legendaries to offer in return, but I can accommodate. Everything I have is legit so I expect the same from you too.
FC Soul Silver: 3139 3223 0945
I'm giving off all these Pokemon for FREE as I'm quitting Pokemon! First come first serve! This list will diminish! PM me if you want any of these fully EV trained, maxed out IVs in stats that matter the most (Jolteon has max speed and max spAttack, others not max), and personally bred. I've used them in tourneys are WON plenty of matches.
****Thank you all! I've given all my Pokemon off to people already! I hope you take care of my Pokemon. Plenty of you have messaged me and I'm sorry I couldn't get back to all of you. This IS first come first serve. Wish you all luck. Peace!!!****
Some of them are flawless, but ALL ARE LEGIT!
And ALL are Smogon-based.
Hi there, I'm looking for ANY Cresselia. The nature does not matter to me in the slightest. However, the IV's do, and I will give more for better IV's.
Things I'm willing to trade in exchange for the Cress: EV Training Services Breeding Services Egg Move Breeding I have some EV trained pokemon, ask what you want *A few shinies, but these would require a very good IV'd cress I need it to be Untouched (or at least have the EV's it have known.) I'm going to be needing multiple cresses, so I'll take any that you're willing to trade me.
Cheers, Eronia
Hi! I'm always interested in having a nice standard OU Battle. Send me a message.
^That's all Gen 4
Black FC - 2494-3425-8807
Cresselia for trade, Message me with offers
I own Heartgold, Platinum and SoulSilver. I am breeding the first four gen starter Pokémon! Send me a message if you want one and I'll get it how you want it (apart from shiny, and I will want more if it's shiny!) I will also breed other Pokémon if you want Just PM me!
Legendaries For Trade!
Events For Trade!
Shiny Pokémon For Trade!
Interested in: Shinies (Offering legendaries)
People banned from trading/battling me: GiantsFan |
Looking for Cresselia and Darkrai to help complete my Pokedex. Don't even want to keep them. Just trade/trade back so it registers in my PokeDex. PM if you can help out.
White 2 FC: 5201 0278 4072
I now breed all Five Generations of Starters on my White 2. I also offer any White 2 exclusive Pokemon and Pokemon infected with Pokerus.
I'm looking for Rare Candies, Heart Scales, Red Shards, Blue Shards, Proteins, Calciums, PP Ups, and PP Maxes.
I have an untouched Cresselia, level 50 available to trade. Will probably be a clone.
I am looking for legit (Cloned OK) at any level:
I don't have anything really to give, not even sure how to get legendaries.
But, this Pokemon is beautiful and I'd love to have it!
Like I said, I don't really have anything.
Looking for any English Cresselia. Offering:
Any starters/evolved starters
lvl 45 UT Kyogre (Sapphire import)
Dialga, Palkia, Giratina, Mesprit, Azelf, Rotom
Many many basic pokemon for pokedex completion needs!
Game: Soul Silver
Name: Agent X
Fire Red Team (0 badges):
Emerald Team (3 badges):
Soul Silver Team (16 badges):
Looking for a LEGIT Cresselia, what event doesn't matter, I just want it to be absolutely legitimate.
Untouched Articuno lvl. 50 / docile nature.
Slightly touched Suicune lvl. 40 / lonely nature.
Slightly touched Entei lvl. 40 / naughty nature.
Slightly touched Raikou lvl. 40 / rash nature.
PM me for business.
"This won't hurt a bit..."
SoulSilver: 3782-6070-5200
X Psychic Safari: Grumpig, Wobbuffet, Gothorita.
I have a spare Cresselia to trade. Looking to couple it with another legendary to trade for a Mew, Celebi, Jirachi, Deoxys, Manaphy, Darkrai, Shaymin, Arceus.
Some other Pokemon I have available to offer are: Rotom, Ho-Oh, Rayquaza, Giratina, Phione and Japanese Dittos. I can also offer plenty of Pokemon from my 5th generation game, if this interests you.
Feel free to send me a PM!
3DS: 4382-2401-9157 | BW2: 1936-8886-4378 | BW: 1292 9421 9497 | DPPt: 3568-5424-6280Spoiler:- More games:
Wii U, X-Box Live, Steam, Apple Game Center: Realinho

subset: commoncrawl


text:
0cart: $0.00
Previous Page
[x] Close Window
Send your friend(s) a link to this product along with a personal message!
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
To: (your friend's email)
Your Message:
Cc me
Please enter the text below:
Overall Rating: Read all reviews | Write a review
Item #: 192528
In stock
20 Reviews - Overall Customer Rating:
10 Ratings Only Reviews - Rating:
Show all reviews | Write a review | Show reviews with photo(s) | Show reviews with video(s)
Reviewed by: FeliciaM
(Read all my reviews)
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Title: Good price on Caillou Supplies
Date: Jul 31, 2013
Cute napkins - good price. Happy to find Caillou merchandise!
Report this review as Inappropriate
Was this review helpful to you? Yes | No
Reviewed by: bkbandp
Title: Worth it
Date: Feb 09, 2013
These are a great addition to any Caillou party and worth it. They are very thick and durable and definitely add to the fun!
Reviewed by: EinSac
Title: Awesome!!!
Date: Nov 14, 2012
Product is durable, colorful, has more pictures on the inside also! Thought that was neat! Loved it!
Reviewed by: Klpendzich
Title: Must have!
Date: Oct 17, 2012
The napkins are a must have purchase for a Caillou themed party! I am sure my Birthday Boy will love them!
Reviewed by: Jerseygal
Location: New Jersey
Title: Great images
Date: Sep 08, 2012
The quality of these napkins are exceptional. I hated to get them dirty.
Reviewed by: mommy2many
Location: MN
Title: Love it!
Date: Jun 03, 2012
So excited to find Caillou! I bought everything and couldn't be more happy with it all. High quality, at a good price and shipping was awesome! I will be a returning costumer.
Reviewed by: jonsay24
Location: atlanta ga
Photos: (click for full-size)
Title: First Party!
Date: Mar 31, 2012
Loves Calliou and cant find him anywhere. So this was a great deal and find! Yey some body had Calliou. :)
Reviewed by: Twinmama3
Title: Exceeded expectations.
Date: Oct 05, 2011
I know napkins aren't exciting, but these are the cutest napkins I've ever seen. if you unfold them, they actually have 4 full color, adorable pictures on them, each different. I was impressed.
Reviewed by: lovemyson
Title: TOO CUTE
Date: Sep 21, 2011
These we're super cute and came in handy! the colors aren't as bright as it appear in the picture but they still are awesome! My son loved them.
Reviewed by: Hollis
Date: Mar 08, 2011
Super cute! I was so glad to find Caillou decorations for my sons 3rd birthday party.
Show all reviews
© CelebrateExpress.com. All Rights Reserved.CEWEB01


text:
Come with us as we visit the showroom via these video clips of our tour. If you already have QuickTime installed as a helper application with your browser, it should launch when you click on the link to the video clip. These are large files and depending on your modem speed, may take awhile to fully download, but they are fun to see. Enjoy! If you need QuickTime...click here to get it for Mac or PC:
Play Pearl Harbor Battleship video


text:
Gear designed for the most demanding rider!
Macna jackets, pants, and gloves are made to
withstand the demands of serious motorcycle riders. Macna is known for their innovative features, attention to detail, excellent fit, superior comfort, stellar protection, and safety features that stand out from the crowd.
Macna All-Season Waterproof Jumper Men's Motorcycle Overpants
Macna Jumper motorcycle overpants for men provide all-season comfort and protection. Learn More$159.99 -
Macna Waterproof Shell Shelter Men's Motorcycle Pants
Macna Shelter rain pants pair with the Shelter jacket to keep you protected from wet weather.
Learn More$59.99 $49.99 -
Macna Upgrade Armor CE Level 2 Back Protector - size medium (SAS-TEC SC-1/12)
Macna upgraded SaS-Tec back armor increases the level of protection provided by your Macna jacket. Learn More$35.00 -
Macna Waterproof Shell Shelter Men's Motorcycle Jacket
The Macna Shelter Motorcycle Jacket is good looking, but more importantly, it will keep you dry even in a torrential downpour. Grab the Shelter rain pants for a complete suit.
Learn More$89.99 -
Macna Summer Waterproof Men's Vantera Motorcycle Glove
Macna's Vantera glove is a waterproof 3-season motorcycle glove for men that features three types of leather, a high-performance knuckle protection system, and a unique waterproof membrane. You'll be hard-pressed to find a glove that matches this level of comfort and protection. Learn More$192.00 -
Macna All-Season Hybrid Chameleon Men's Motorcycle Jacket
The Macna Chameleon motorcycle jacket for men is an all-season jacket that is two jackets in one. Macna's Chameleon motorcycle jacket consists of a leather core jacket for maximum protection and a direct laminated outer shell for protection from wind and rain. The Macna Chameleon jacket is completely different from any other motorcycle jacket seen before. Learn More$699.99 $394.15 -
Macna All-Season Waterproof Lily Women's Motorcycle Jacket
The Macna Lily Women's Motorcycle Jacket offers many of the same comfort and protection features found in Macna mens motorcycle jackets, including detachable waterproof and thermal liners, venting, and impact protection. The Macna Lily jacket also features a form-fitting cut, adjustable waist, and arm straps for a custom fit and flattering appearance. Learn More$289.99 $159.16 -
SAS-TEC SC-1/07 CE hip protector armor upgrade (fits all Macna pants), pair
Macna CE hip protector made by SAS-TEC increases the level of impact protection provided by your Macna riding pants. Learn More$19.99 -
Macna Winter Waterproof Women's Ruby Motorcycle Glove
Macna's Ruby motorcycle glove for women is a full-coverage waterproof cold weather glove made from a combination of soft goat leather and two types of man-made materials. Learn More$99.99 -
Macna Winter Waterproof Men's Polartic Motorcycle Glove
Macna's Polartic motorcycle glove is a waterproof cold weather glove for men that features a combination of soft natural leathers and man-made leather, thermal insulation and a fur liner, as well as semi-hard knuckle armor for exceptional comfort and protection.
Learn More$219.99


text:
Beyond Vintage
Lace Back Button Up
Beyond Vintage scours the globe looking for unique vintage pieces to inspire modern designs. Garments reflect the look and feel of styles that span decades, but are reworked to fit in with your current wardrobe.
- Self: 100% silk
Combo: 58% nylon 42% cotton - Dry clean only
- Button front closure
- Lace shoulder and back panel
- Button cuffed sleeves
- Styled with AG Adriano Goldschmied Legging in Bronze.
- Styled with House of Harlow Zig Zag Tribal Cuff in 14k Gold.
- Styled with House of Harlow Crystal Orb Ring in 14k Gold with Hematite Crystal Pave.
- Styled with House of Harlow Bone Stack Ring Set in Gold.
- Modeled in size S. See fit guide for model's dimensions.
- Revolve Style No. BEYO-WS86
- Manufacturer Style No. BV-2117C1
- Can't find your size? Place a special order inquiry for this item.


text:
Sunday, 22 April 2012
Reactions: |
69 comments:
- voiceforchildren said...
Just left this comment on Rico's Blog which is just as apt here.
Have just read the suspension transcript, once more, in its entirety and anybody with half a brain can conclude that is half more than Senator Le Marquand has.
Your readers MUST be encouraged to read this transcript, especially those who think it unfair to describe Ian Le Marquand as brainless. To qualify that statement and to demonstrate the desperation of Ian Le Marquand (the Law Offices stooge) to pin something on Graham Power QPM one only needs to point out that if Senator Le Marquand had have looked in the telephone directory, he wouldn't be looking so brainless right now.
Selected extracts from transcript.
Senator B.I. Le Marquand:
which is the tape recordings area. If Mr. Power were able to give me an undertaking that he would not make such tape recordings in future without the knowledge or consent of individuals then I would not view that as being a matter which would warrant consideration of suspension, if I can put it that way. We can effectively dispose of that for the purposes ...
Dr. T Brain:
With respect to the tape recording of any telephone calls, I would draw to your attention this extract from the Jersey telephone directory, under P where police is stated as an entry, there are various numbers there and I will just read it out for you. I am quite happy, of course, for you to have this copy although I am sure you can obtain a copy of the relevant page for yourself. "Police, States of Jersey Police Headquarters, P.O. (Post Office) Box 789, SHJE 48ZD. Please note: calls may be recorded or monitored." Now, the recording or monitoring of telephone calls is a public statement contained in the Jersey telephone directory. If we are looking at the seriousness of the nature of any matters currently disclosed by Operation Blast then I would ask you to consider them fully in the context of that very, very public statement that is made in the Jersey telephone directory.(END)
That's about the calibre of it.............................BRAINLESS - Sunday, 22 April 2012 15:10:00 BST
- voiceforchildren said...
Just to remind readers of Rico's live and interactive broadcast tonight Sunday 22nd April 2012 at 6pm HERE - Sunday, 22 April 2012 15:25:00 BST
Ian le Marquand should be tried in a real court for his offences against Mr. Power and by association the child abuse survivors.
- Sunday, 22 April 2012 15:51:00 BST
Oh how well you have summed our Home Affairs Minister up Stuart.
Sadly, the type of ministry he delivers in his church is that which brainwashes people. It seems it is not only in his church he tries to do that.
However Mr Le Marquand, much as it may surprise you, some of us have just a modicum of intelligence unlike yourself who have lied and misled the public.
Shame on you. - Sunday, 22 April 2012 17:56:00 BST
Speaking in tongues (glossolalia) is a gift of the Holy Spirit. It is described in the account of Pentacost in the New Testament and can be heard at several of the Island's Christian congregations. I've witnessed it myself many times; it's not sinister and those who speak in tongues believe it to be a form of holy language.
- Sunday, 22 April 2012 20:26:00 BST
Why do Ian Le Marquand's supporters, especially in his church, fail to see how tainted they will become by association? They should realize by now, this documented record of ILM's dishonest and corrupt actions will never go away. It will only expand as the true nature of the man becomes ever more permanently incorporated into the account of Jersey's horrific child abuse and human rights record. Everyone who stays silent is risking association with a sinister level of political crime which will - absolutely and ultimately - shaft Jersey internationally.
Denver Gals - Sunday, 22 April 2012 20:44:00 BST
Anonymous 20:26:
Your assertion that speaking in tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit is not accurate. It is more accurate to say that it may be a gift of the Holy Spirit. But it may equally be something arising from another source altogether - self-delusion, for example. Which - agreed - means that the practice isn't terribly sinister; but it is not a little sad.
I have long experience of churches where "speaking in tongues" is accepted practice: I would estimate that the self-deluding outnumber the genuinely gifted by upwards of twenty to one. - Sunday, 22 April 2012 22:46:00 BST
Speaking in tongues (glossolalia) is a gift of the Holy Spirit. It is described in the account of Pentacost in the New Testament and can be heard at several of the Island's Christian congregations. I've witnessed it myself many times; it's not sinister and those who speak in tongues believe it to be a form of holy language
BOTTY WATER - Sunday, 22 April 2012 23:03:00 BST
'Babble on Ian'
I was going to write 'oh dear'.
But then I saw how appropriate your pun was.
As well as being the location of the Tower of Babel that God thwarted by casting upon men the 'confusion of tongues', Babylon and Babylonian are also watch words, to this day for excess, arrogance, materialism, corrupt power, dissolution and decadence.
Does that remind us of anywhere?
Babble on Ian, indeed.
Does the 'Tongues' language have a word for irony? - Sunday, 22 April 2012 23:37:00 BST
How embarrassingly wrong and proved to be wrong can Ian Le Marquand, who is completely off the wall in his decisions last in office ?
Rico's objective and factual reporting has seriously caught the liar red handed and is fully documented.
How far down the well, do you have to be before the Jersey Evening Proper-gander government mouthpiece turns against you.
I read the blogs, and under the Taser story he is getting literally hammered on the blog with JEP allowing posts through that pull no punches.
What in your opinion is going on, and why has the States not called a vote of no confidence in him as the people certainly have ? or is the evidence now so strong this will happen any day ?
How many times has he tried people as a Judge on the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and now disgraces his office ?
Anonymous - Monday, 23 April 2012 00:29:00 BST
The intent of this post is obviously not to evaluate or debate the Biblical history of speaking in tongues. It is to make a point about the babbling nonsense coming from a corrupt public official who hides his criminal character behind the cloak of religion.
- Monday, 23 April 2012 00:37:00 BST
I've suffered the displeasure of having to work with someone who had opposing views from mine, but was in a position of power of me and it was hellish.
He would bluster and attempt to blind me with science, skirting around issues while avoiding my logical reasoning.
Any attempt to reason with him (on pointless work-related issues) was like pulling teeth. It was like a game to him, I could see him enjoying trying to tie me in knots, taking his time to strategically choose his words to precisely out manouever me, calmly as he could, without digging himself into a hole.
Basically I couldn't win, although I knew I was right. The chump was just abusing his power and enjoying it. I'm delighted not to be working there any more, and pity my former colleague who still have to put up with him (and they all know what a prize plonker he is).
ILM seems to be exactly the same kind of creature. Full of misguided self-belief, the power to get their own way, and no real friends.
Take away the power and they're nothing - just jokes.
(Word verif.: babler!) - Monday, 23 April 2012 10:33:00 BST
Le marquand goes against all that is taught in the Christian message,he has without doubt lost his way,(or his marbles)just the type who would lie three times,I would like to be a fly on the wall on his judgement day!!
- Monday, 23 April 2012 11:08:00 BST
Rico's posting of the transcript is indeed mighty revealing.
Like most readers, I suspect, I found myself shaking my head in disbelief a number of times. However, perhaps the most striking part to me was Le Marquand's response to Dr Brain's argument that he (Le Marquand) ought to consider whether he was too personally conflicted to continue to oversee the suspension process.
Following Le Marquand's breathless "expose" of Operation Blast to the States, Graham Power filed a formal complaint claiming that, in doing so, Le Marquand had breached the confidentiality clauses in the disciplinary code of conduct.
Dr Brain argued that the existence of such a complaint, which was neither frivolous nor vexatious, gave rise to a conflict of interest which cast doubt on the ability of Le Marquand to continue overseeing the suspension process.
Le Marquand's response appeared to be genuine bewilderment: he seemed utterly incapable of grasping the simple concept that natural justice requires a person acting in a judicial role to be free from actual or apparent bias.
As seems to be his modus operandi, rather than making a substantive argument explaining why he did not believe he was conflicted, he reverted to Dickensian-lawyer mode, rambling into rhetorical cul-de-sacs about the finer points of Ministerial delegation. All the while ignoring the central point: if he was conflicted, he was not a proper person to act in a judicial capacity.
While many of Le Marquand's ramblings are offensive to plain English, his comment that Graham Power was receiving a salary and therefore well-able to afford legal representation was simply offensive, period.
How much of OUR money has Le Marquand squandered to date on trying to find something to pin on Grahman Power? Somewhere north of a million pounds? Well, this is the sort of money Graham Power would have had to spend on defending himself in equivalent terms.
Only somebody with no grasp of reality could possibly make such a glibly pompous statement.
Let's see Le Marquand put his money where his mouth is: let him refund the tax-payer for all the costs incurred in framing Graham Power, and then litigate to try to recover the costs - again using his own money.
I mean, I'm sure he could find a lawyer here at a knock-down price of £500 an hour if he shopped around a bit. - Monday, 23 April 2012 11:37:00 BST
- voiceforchildren said...
Deputy Tadier on JERSEY JUSTICE - Monday, 23 April 2012 12:19:00 BST
A couple of wweks ago you mentioned that you would be making some significant new postings.
Any news on that front? - Monday, 23 April 2012 14:38:00 BST
Rico's objective and factual reporting has seriously caught the liar red handed and is fully documented.
Rico has done a top class job. - Monday, 23 April 2012 16:39:00 BST
Re "While many of Le Marquand's ramblings are offensive to plain English, his comment that Graham Power was receiving a salary and therefore well-able to afford legal representation was simply offensive, period.
How much of OUR money has Le Marquand squandered to date on trying to find something to pin on Grahman Power? Somewhere north of a million pounds? Well, this is the sort of money Graham Power would have had to spend on defending himself in equivalent terms.
Only somebody with no grasp of reality could possibly make such a glibly pompous statement."
I expect ILM does have a grasp of reality to make that comment in that he knew too well the difference between what he could spend and what Graham Power could spend. In fact I would go so far as to suggest he was rubbing salt in the wounds to show how he can do what he likes with our money but Graham Power does not have that luxury. Yep, I took ILMs comment to be extremely derisory and very pompous too as you pointed out. - Monday, 23 April 2012 17:49:00 BST
Anomymous at Monday, 23 April 2012 11:37:00 GMT+01:00, wrote, "Le Marquand's response appeared to be genuine bewilderment: he seemed utterly incapable of grasping the simple concept that natural justice requires a person acting in a judicial role to be free from actual or apparent bias."
An acquaintance of mine who follows the Jersey abuse scandal closely, found this to be a profoundly significant observation and showed it to me over lunch, here in a distant country. We were pondering the reasons this minister still gets away with this behavior, and that bewilderment described by the anonymous commenter seems to sum up not only the mad minister himself, but all who are not appalled by his arrogant ignorance.
Kuddos to the commenter; the other observations made in the comment were equally perceptive. It can only be a matter of time before the thick blanket of awareness settles too heavily for this system to remain tenable. - Monday, 23 April 2012 18:06:00 BST
Dear Mr Syvret,
As an experienced ex politician you stated the opposite to Phillip Bailhache at the hustings when you stated that Ministers and senior civil servants lie.
You are also known for your strong stand against corruption. The JFSC are set up and equiped in order to stop financial corruption.
Are foreign investors also being stolen from, while JFSC executives look the other " Jersey Way "
Anonymous. - Monday, 23 April 2012 18:39:00 BST
- Póló said...
Anonymous (@ 11:37) above has put it very well. I was also struck by the two points he stresses.
ILM did not seem to understand the idea of a conflict of interest, which of course speaks volumes for how he must have conducted himself in office down the years.
And the idea that Graham Power should squander his money on defending himself against malicious allegations just because ILM thinks he might be able to afford it is obscene, and also gives an insight into how this man sees his role in the Jersey system of governance.
As Stuart is wont to say: you just couldn't make it up. - Monday, 23 April 2012 18:41:00 BST
- Ian Evans said...
- Monday, 23 April 2012 19:37:00 BST
- rico sorda said...
Hi Stuart,
Thanks for highlighting my posting.
It has been a long road for me on these issues. They started as gut feelings and ended up with a fully exposed timeline that shows exactly what our current Home Affairs Minister is about. It just shows you what can be done when you take the time to investigate.
The fact that Senator Le Marquand is still a Minister says everything about the current States Assembly.
The JEP are running after Ozouf to try a pin a half million handshake on him when everyman and his dog knows it was Frank Walkers fault. So, why don't they challenge Senator Le Marquand and his incompetence /corruption in a public office?
rs - Monday, 23 April 2012 20:03:00 BST
- Ian Evans said...
- Monday, 23 April 2012 20:15:00 BST
Dear Stuart,
Having just seen the posted copy of the Scrutiny Newsletter where a photo of bags upon bags of toxic ash waste from our lovely new incinerator are being 'lined up' in "so called" pits at La Colette land fill reminds me of a certain young Politician who when, having the 'gaul' to raise the subject of ash disposal on the so called waterfront, was howled down by the childish foot stompers of the time. This picture to my mind perhaps shows more than any other the 'Jersey Way' of sweeping all that is toxic under the carpet, albeit for some other future generation to sort out the toxic mess and this is without taking into account Guernseys contribution!. It is perhaps very telling to see how many of your 'lost' battles have since come to be outstanding victories, what is so very sad is the simple fact that the past foot stampers will still see fit to stamp their little tootsies, where is the true long lost calibre of our 'past' Statesmen and Stateswomen gone when these troglodyte replacements are hell bent on petty point scoring to the detriment of the people of this Island. - Monday, 23 April 2012 20:59:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
I see it's Stella o'clock, eh Jon?
Stuart - Monday, 23 April 2012 22:15:00 BST
- Ian Evans said...
You getting it as well Stuart?
Hee Hee, PMSL :) - Monday, 23 April 2012 22:17:00 BST
Stuart, a little bird tells me that your two law-suits, against the Jersey police and the Jersey Attorney General, get formally 'tabled' for the first time, in Jersey's Royal Court at 2.30 p.m, this Friday?
Presumably, no conflicted judge will be sitting to hear whatever application you make concerning the scheduling of the forthcoming court cases?
Am I right in assuming that your claims name, in significant ways, Michael Birt and William Bailhache? If so, it could hardly be them who hear your initial application. But, now I say that, isn't it the case that Barking Bill did hear one of your applications, even though he was an interested party in it?
So, as it can't be Bailhache or Birt who hear it, one of the local Commissioners perhaps? Frances Hamon? Oh dear, no.
Julian Clyde-Smith maybe? But, you do know about his conflicts? Don't you???
If not, better get asking! - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 00:10:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
Yes - Friday, 2.30 - that's correct.
And yes - the rest of your observations are sound, too.
And whilst I was not aware until recently of a profoundly serious conflict of interests concerning Julian Clyde-Smith - I am now.
And it is a concern I have to now conclude is correct - as I've e-mailed him - via the court secretariat in Jersey - put the conflict to him, and asked him directly, to confirm or deny it.
Clyde-Smith refuses to now answer.
I've said to him that I - and others - have no choice other than to take his refusal to answer a simple and clear question - as a de facto confirmation of the concern.
Still - he refuses to answer.
So - yes - that conflict of interest is known to us.
And its damning.
Not just of Clyde-Smith - but the whole "Jersey Way" apparatus.
You know - if I was a malicious and vindictive man - I'd actually be pleased right now - at the way things have panned-out. All of the arrogance by the Jersey mafia - that sense of invulnerability - the hubris - all those occasions when we would have settled for a few small victories for what was right; maybe all of that Kafkaesque absurdity was worth enduring?
Or maybe all of those jaw-dropping complacencies - that naked, undisguised class-war - the idleness, incompetence and stupidity of the Whitehall apparatus and the UK politicians who have striven for years to protect the Jersey mafia; maybe those of us who have sought only the proper rule of law, had to put up with the staggering conduct of these clowns - to arrive at this moment?
There's no shortage of opportunities to indulge in schadenfreude, if one was so inclined.
Instead - what we see is a sad and wretched spectacle.
The brazen corruption of power - which is inevitable, when those who wield power do so absolutely - and are not subject to any functioning check and balance - at all.
This is the true picture of the British establishment - in the 21st century.
Not so different, really, to so many of those corrupt, repressive gangster regimes our glorious leaders tell us we must send our troops to die against.
In what has been one of the most alarming aspects of the situation, it became clear to me, in a kind of epiphany, maybe four years ago, that the Jersey polity was, truly, a ship of fools.
During the last couple of years, I've come to the same realisation concerning Whitehall - and the powers-that-be in London.
It's simply a ship-of-fools - when it comes to its responsibilities - and obligations - concerning the Crown Dependencies.
In truth, these people are simply idiots.
If they weren't - they wouldn't be faced with the contagion billowing like a metastasised cancer, off of the Jersey oligarchy.
Stuart - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 00:45:00 BST
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/the_bfms#outgoing-197777 - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 08:29:00 BST
The Aitkenhead report is now available on line at;
http://www.gov.je/News/2012/Pages/AitkenheadReports.aspx - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:53:00 BST
- Ian Evans said...
- Wednesday, 25 April 2012 19:18:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
Stella O'clock comes a bit early tonight eh Jon?
I was going to suggest the bad weather must have kept you in, but then I remembered onanistic troglodyte Mittians rarely venture forth in any event, save to acquire more larger.
Stuart - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 20:21:00 BST
Did he swear upon his oath??? If so please explain the bible and the left hand being used instead of the right.
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/120424-jmurdoch-9a.380;380;7;70.jpg - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 22:19:00 BST
Good luck for Friday Mr Syvret
It's been a long fight for you up till now but I'm sure in the next 15 to 20 years we are going to see a positive change. - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 22:27:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
Is the use of the left hand supposed to make a difference?
Is that like keeping your fingers crossed behind your back when you made a bet with another kid at school?
Stuart - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 23:24:00 BST
We would like to closely follow your case from over here, as supporters across the pond. When and where should we look for updates? Will VFC be interviewing you following the session?
Elle - Wednesday, 25 April 2012 23:27:00 BST
I know that Sinicism, Stuart as I too feel the same when it comes to these clowns and there dressing up costumes and funny handshakes, I was just asking if it matters to the court or to the British system of injustice or legally so to speak if legally means anything at all. I have no Idea as I'm know very little about the law.
- Wednesday, 25 April 2012 23:32:00 BST
- Thursday, 26 April 2012 07:25:00 BST
The Law Office will surely be working overnight tonight, trying desparately to find a way to get your Royal Court case tomorrow Struck off.
Do you think they will manage to this time? - Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:02:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
Tomorrow is simply the formal tabling. Discussion will be limited to factors of scheduling and adjournment.
Of course they will try to have the cases struck-out at some future hearing.
This is Jersey; what else would you expect.
Stuart - Thursday, 26 April 2012 13:54:00 BST
"These sequestered nooks are the public offices of the legal profession, where writs are issued, judgments signed, declarations filed, and numerous other ingenious machines put in motion for the torture and torment of His Majesty's liege subjects, and the comfort and emolument of the practitioners of the law."
Charles Dickens, the Pickwick Papers - Thursday, 26 April 2012 16:42:00 BST
- voiceforchildren said...
A FIRST FOR JERSEY. - Thursday, 26 April 2012 17:03:00 BST
- Siobhan Gallichan said...
left on the Rag tonight, not sure if it will get posted - my last two or three have vanished without trace...
Ok, putting aside Syvret's court appearences etc, a few years back he was sacked as Health minister for saying he had no confidence in the services etc...
So, howcome these years later they haven't improved? What is so wrong in Jersey that the island simply finds it impossible to care for children properly?
Is there some kind of mental block in the States and Civil Service that prevents them from acting correctly?
Or is it deliberate...?
Considering some of the horror stories that have emerged, and some of the people involved, that last question may possibly, possibly, be more then just a silly comment..... - Thursday, 26 April 2012 18:47:00 BST
Now, you realise presumably that the "court" you go before tomorrow is an artifact; not a real, functioning court of law? That it's all just "emperor's new clothes" and smoke and mirrors?
Simple: bed-rock of English justice, even, long before the European Convention Human Rights was dreamt of, a judicial procedure must be objective and impartial. Not only that, so strict and established is the case-law, judicial procedures have to meet the test of appearing to be objective and impartial; that is, they can't even look as though they might be conflicted.
Any judicial process that fails those test is, well, not a judicial process. It is something else.
The Jersey judicial system cannot hope to meet those tests. It's as simple as that.
What the Crown tolerates here and turns a blind eye to is a corrupt simulacrum of "justice".
There's only one path you can take - and I don't mean Strasbourg.
But I guess you know that? - Thursday, 26 April 2012 19:00:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
Yes, I know that.
Stuart - Thursday, 26 April 2012 19:44:00 BST
The world is facing a wave of uprisings, protests, revolutions and outright war. Everyday thousands are being killed in the name of democracy. Arab dictators are being swept away, public spaces being occupied, slum dwellers in revolt, cyberspace buzzing with utopian dreams. Events we were told were consigned to history - democratic revolt and social revolution - are being lived by millions of people. This is all available online. #paulmasonnews
Recession has lead to currency wars. Currency wars lead to trade wars. Trade wars lead to outright war.
Study the history of global economics since 1840.
Bailhache, with all this going on, wants Jersey to go independent. Its suicide based on greed and political ignorance.
Stop him in his tracks and protect your way of life before we lose it all. - Thursday, 26 April 2012 22:16:00 BST
Good Luck for today Stuart.
Will JC-S's conflicts surface ?
Will The Local Media mention it ?
Doubt it, maybe not today.
But keep it up ! - Friday, 27 April 2012 06:27:00 BST
Stuart, I commented above and said, 'So, as it can't be Bailhache or Birt who hear it, one of the local Commissioners perhaps? Frances Hamon? Oh dear, no.
Julian Clyde-Smith maybe? But, you do know about his conflicts? Don't you???
If not, better get asking!'
Well, how'd it go, and who did they get as judge? - Friday, 27 April 2012 21:37:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
I used to use the phrase "you couldn't make it up", quite often, but now I'm so inured to the extraordinary, I forget how crackers the Jersey mafia are.
It was William Bailhache in the chair today. And notwithstanding my obvious and immediate recusal application, he refused to do so - and spent the next half hour arguing with me - even though I explained how he was directly, centrally involved in the matters I am challenging - and I even read out some excerpts from the Order of Justice against the Office of Attorney General.
I suppose one shouldn't complain; he screwed-up dramatically in at least three significant things he revealed. And his performance today furnished us with more evidential material as to how the administration of justice simply doesn't work in Jersey.
But stepping back from the predictable madness - there was an interesting occurrence. The Police are not being represented by Howard "Blunt" sharp (who again, quite plainly, hadn't read the papers)but are instead being represented by private-sector lawyers. The representative of the police spoke to me briefly before the proceedings began, and in a surprising display of common sense, she informed me that my application to adjourn sine die would not be opposed by them.
The Attorney General however - through Blunt Sharp - insisted - against the obvious public interest - that my case against the Attorney General get listed - for the inevitable strike-out application.
So there's now going to be a double-run of litigation - two cases dealing with broadly the same facts, evidence and witnesses - when it could have been dealt with in one set of proceedings.
And barking Bill Bailhache was rooting throughout - as the presiding judge - for Blunt "7 Bedford Row" Sharp and the Attorney General - even though Bailhache is the prima facie malfeasant party at the heart of the matter.
I even reminded him how he had attempted to criminally coerce the legitimate Police Chief Graham Power into dropping an investigation, and when Mr. Power refused, Bailhache said to him, "so be it" and few days later the Police Chief was illegally suspended.
Jersey: couldn't make it up.
Stuart - Friday, 27 April 2012 22:10:00 BST
Stuart, is that for real? You're telling us William Bailhache presided over a tactically and strategically important court decision on timing of applications and procedures, even though he's a key party in the substance of your applications?
And that he argued against you?!?!?!
The thing that causes me to express such amazement is not the motivation, but the stupidity on display. In fact, is not another of your sayings, 'never underestimate the stupidity of the Jersey oligarchy'?
My God. The fools. It is groupthink isn't it? These people really have lost the plot. - Friday, 27 April 2012 22:36:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
Yep - that's for real.
It was even better than that, in that as I was attempting to defend my position against Bailhache's oppressions - he was suddenly supported by another lawyer from the benches, who stood up, interrupted me, and said words to the effect, "is Mr Syvret going to shut up yet, as I'm here waiting to represent my private clients?'
It was brilliant, really.
I was quite restrained in response and didn't proceed to demand of him that he was not - surely - thinking of charging his private clients for time passing as a result of other, unrelated judicial proceedings?
Let's face it, it would have been a redundant question.
But I did think the interjection was great in an entertaining way. I didn't recognise the lawyer in question, but his name will be on the transcript. let's hope his clients peruse their bill very closely.
Stuart - Friday, 27 April 2012 22:55:00 BST
- Saturday, 28 April 2012 00:18:00 BST
This is a great idea. Just the antedote to Bailhache's feudalistic little Jersey mentality. Go look, and take out an e-mail subscription, and pass the link on. Jersey Today
- Saturday, 28 April 2012 11:36:00 BST
- voiceforchildren said...
Rico will be live and interactive tomorrow night (Sunday 29th April at 7pm BST). He will be discussing a number of issues concerning Jersey and interacting with the online audience. The broadcast will be, up to, an hour in duration and can be found HERE - Saturday, 28 April 2012 13:47:00 BST
- rico sorda said...
Stuart, my later posting ties in with what you are doing. This is about the conflict of interest on Graham Powers Judicial Review. It really is a must read.
You couldn't make it up.
This might just be the most conflicted Judicial Review in the whole of the British Isles
http://ricosorda.blogspot.com/2012/04/operation-end-game-21-judicial-review.html - Saturday, 28 April 2012 21:27:00 BST
Rico I think you're right, possibly the most conflicted in the British Isles.
You should remember, these are gentlemen with manners you speak of and perhaps these particular gentlemen can ignore, personal conflicts of interests in determining Mr Powers personal rights or those of the commoners in his right to a fair hearing. - Sunday, 29 April 2012 00:05:00 BST
It is shocking to read the latest Rico Sorda posting because almost every point of evidence the judicial ruling is based on has now been systematically discredited or logically disputed from his part time investigative reporting.
Nothing about the case against Graham Power is evidenced. It can't withstand any honest public scrutiny whatsoever, let alone a lawful judicial review.
That is the simple, if startling truth, but it ultimately leads to increasingly complex issues about Jersey's ability to function under the guise of a respectable government.
I think Jersey's loss of credibility from what Rico has uncovered should expose the judiciary to any international reader as an entirely corrupt enterprise. - Sunday, 29 April 2012 02:28:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
During one of the early appearances I made before Michael Birt and William Bailhache friend, Christopher Pitchers, I stated quite plainly "Jersey's judicial apparatus is a criminal enterprise."
And it is.
The difficulty they face is that increasing numbers of people now see that fact.
And that's a fatal occurrence for the racket.
Once that "magic" has gone - once the thing is seen for what it is - under the gaze of close public scrutiny - it can never be restored.
Stuart - Sunday, 29 April 2012 10:06:00 BST
Your comment about the racket being under public scrutiny is profoundly true at a time when documents are read in multiple countries within minutes of your posting them. There is no going back. - Sunday, 29 April 2012 10:24:00 BST
- Sunday, 29 April 2012 11:19:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
The silly little man behind the curtain in the Wizard of Oz.
Yes - that's exactly how it is.
And the curtain has been pulled open on the Jersey judiciary.
Stuart - Sunday, 29 April 2012 15:15:00 BST
- voiceforchildren said...
An interview with Abuse Survivor Jean from the Grouville Home For Girls who tells us GOOD CAN COME FROM BAD.
She is very appreciative of meeting with you and wants that message conveyed. - Sunday, 29 April 2012 15:35:00 BST
Are you dead?
Hopefully some one will pop around and check on you , will send this message to your mates I think he might have your e mail in his contacts.
Look after yourself mate, no one else wants to look after you - Tuesday, 1 May 2012 21:48:00 BST
- Ex-Senator Stuart Syvret said...
I'm quaking in my boots.
Doesn't it occur to you cretins that if the death-threats were going to work, I would have quietly gone away - a long time ago.
Stuart - Tuesday, 1 May 2012 21:56:00 BST
Ring the coppers Stuart , they just love you down at the cop shop.
Especially now your suing there boss.
Ha Ha - Tuesday, 1 May 2012 22:01:00 BST
When was the last time you wore a pair of boots to do any positive work ?
- Tuesday, 1 May 2012 22:15:00 BST
Why do you think that was a death threat.
I think you are reading to much into that, it looks to me that it is someone being very sarcastic.
I guess when you are such a high profile person you can't be to careful - Tuesday, 1 May 2012 22:23:00 BST
Unless there is another (more intelligent?) monkey imitating him, the source of those threats can be listened to here.
There is a difference between sarcasm and threats.
The audio (directed at Mr.Syvret's landlord) includes:
"we're going to [have sex with*] you" (repeated in the conversation)
"Nurse M is going to kill you and your family"
Who "we" are is unclear, and "have sex with*" replaces another word (but even the literal meaning would not surprise me)
It is worrying that "Worthless" indicated common propose or association with [ex-military] "nurse M" -presumably that is what "we" meant.
People like Jon (and possibly "nurse M") are useful to the present authorities, just like the blackshirts were useful to the Nazis.
It seems unlikely that this was a one off but it is an occasion on which he was caught and with it being on tape even the authorities had little choice but to act, in spite of the previous co-operative PR enterprise.
Care in the community is perhaps not working -this could be a train crash waiting to happen. - Sunday, 6 May 2012 15:24:00 BST


text:
Welcome to eLearning!
Our team of professional staff assists with the integration of technology and online, web-enhanced, and face-to-face courses. We provide instructional design, media design, training, and support. To learn more about eLearning, explore the links in the eLearning section on the right. |
Find us on campus:Molstead Library, 2nd floor |


text:
While the top athletes in the world are preparing to compete in Sochi, Deloitte's sponsorship of the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) has supported its core mission of promoting sport and developing champions. By providing strategic insight and professional services, Deloitte helps the USOC ensure that the members of Team USA can direct all of their energy to one goal: performing at their highest level as they represent our country on the world stage. Sport competitions put a human face on our efforts, providing a reminder of how our involvement supports individual athletes in the pursuit of their dreams. We're proud to do our part to make a difference―on a global level and in human terms.
October 29th marked 100 days until the Opening Ceremony of the 2014 Olympic Winter Games in Sochi, Russia. Deloitte is proud to announce its roster of featured athletes on Team USA. These eight U.S. Olympic and Paralympic legends and hopefuls will compete in a wide range of sports, including nordic skiing, skeleton, bobsleigh, speed skating, figure skating, Paralympic alpine skiing, and sled hockey.
Deloitte, a sponsor of the U.S. Olympic Committee and Team USA since 2009, extended our sponsorship agreement through 2020 (press release). As a trusted advisor with the USOC, Deloitte shapes long-term strategy, improves operational efficiency, and provides a range of business services.