Thursday, July 21, 2011
Sunday, July 17, 2011
The acquittal of Casey Anthony, the 25-year-old young mother, of the murder of her photogenic 2-year-old daughter Caylee Anthony has caused outrage across the United States. 2 out of 3 Americans believe Casey Anthony to be guilty of the murder.
Why the fury at the acquittal? Is this the result of reality TV, Nancy Grace, CSI or the American tradition that one side must win in sport, or a mix of all these? A murder trial is a real life event and not TV entertainment, which Nancy Grace is.
The United States justice system is imperfect, but then no justice system in any country, society, or culture can be perfect. The subject is too complex. There is always a system of checks and balances necessary to save the innocent. This means that some guilty people will slip through the net. A society where innocents can be sent to jail on circumstantial evidence to make sure that ALL guilty are punished is barbaric and brutal.
It might be difficult to see that someone, in real life, can be not guilty, while still being not innocent. Reality TV, CSI and Judge Judy fog the issue.
In this specific case:
- Casey Anthony is probably not innocent, but we do not know what she is guilty of.
- We do not know who murdered Caylee. Only the Anthony family does.
- We do not know exactly how Caylee was killed.
- We do not even know if Caylee was murdered or if it was due to callous stupidity, neglect or an “accident.”
- We do not know if Casey was sexually abused as a child by her father George, or by her brother Lee.
What we know:
- Casey behaved in a way that is pathological. But not totally abnormal for an immature victim of sexual abuse as a child.
- Casey’s family is dysfunctional. No, Casey’s family is toxically dysfunctional.
- Casey’s family do not understand the concept of loyalty. But they do appear closed like a narcissistic family.
- Casey is a pathological liar. Is this a result of nature or nurture? How much is learned behavior from her parents’ behavior?
- Casey’s father, George Anthony, is a liar.
- Casey’s mother, Cindy Anthony, is not only a liar, but an embarrassingly lousy liar.
- Cindy Anthony is controlling.
Vengeance or Justice?
This is a fundamental question in the Caylee Anthony case. That there is nobody held accountable for the murder of this beautiful child cuts into the heart of the sense of justice all normal people feel.
Vengeance directed against a person who did not do the callous deed is not justice. In our Western societies, there is the idea of prison as a reforming institution. There are two major reasons people are sent to prison: firstly to prevent others from committing similar crimes, and secondly to reform the criminal so that on release he or she will not reoffend.
The question of the death sentence is a debate on the side of these two issues. There are some people who cannot feel remorse and cannot be reformed. Psychopaths.
Casey Anthony’s behavior was disgusting, that a mother can behave in such a way when her 2-year-old daughter is missing, or had recently died, is difficult for normal people to understand.
How much of that behavior was due to psychological issues resulting from Casey’s father molesting her when she was a child?
Her mother Cindy was in denial while Casey was pregnant. Casey’s pregnancy was not treated in a normal way. There was a rejection of Caylee before birth and a rejection of Casey after Caylee’s birth. Cindy Anthony used Caylee to control Casey. This family had narcissistic and toxic behavior patterns. Was this that which resulted in Casey to lie and act without apparent remorse after Caylee went missing
If Casey Anthony had been found guilty and sentenced to death she would not have been given a lethal injection. The waiting list in Florida’s death row is so long she would die of old age before her turn came.
What Future for Casey Anthony?
Casey Anthony has spent the last few years in jail. Mainly in solitary confinement.
She has been separated from her toxic family. That is maybe the main benefit she has had from her stay in jail. She must stay away from her family, as in never contact again, for the rest of her life.
She has had plenty of time for reflection.
She has matured. Casey is probably still not an adult emotionally, psychologically and mentally.
She will still need years of therapy before she “finds herself.” One therapy that would be beneficial for Casey is Dialectical Behavioral Therapy.
If she can go through that there is a possibility that Casey Anthony can be reformed and live her life as a constructive member of society. If this happens, she will be filled daily with a cringe inducing shame for how she behaved, and what she did when she was an early twenty something.
She will remember photographs of her beautiful 2-year-old daughter. That is a worse punishment than locking her away without therapy, keeping her in a pre-programmed narcissistic mind frame, where she is angry, but unrepentant and constantly blaming others.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
His lawyer, Mark Stephens, has heard from Swedish authorities that there has been a “secretly empanelled” grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia. This might be why the UK and Swedish authorities want to keep Assange in jail, long enough for the United States to stitch together some form of charge on which to extradite him to the United States.
Since late last month, Wikileaks has been slowly releasing some 250,000 U.S. diplomatic cables. Wikileaks previously released thousands of U.S. military documents on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq
Actually it is not Julian Assange who is guilty for leaking these documents. He is only the messenger. It is the United States authorities. What sort of national security system do they have when millions of people have access to this information? Bradley manning the private, who leaked these documents to Wikileaks in the first place, was disciplined two times during training for breaches of security. His officers should have been aware that he was not psychologically and motivationally suitable for the work he was doing.
Bradley Manning’s chain of command are guilty, he should never have been given his posting.
The charges Assange is accused of are ridiculous. The women are big girls and they were very willing to go to bed with Assange, even behaving like a stalker in one case. Rape is a serious crime and rapists deserve harsh penalties. Women who falsely accuse men should also be punished, and prosecutors who allow themselves to be political stooges and play roles in political conspiracies should be fired.
But where does that leave Julian Assange? A poll in Time magazine had Assange on the top of the list for most influential person in 2010. Russian Prime Minister Putin suggested he be nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Hillary Clinton is probably preparing a kennel for him at Guantanamo Bay.
Monday, October 13, 2008
McCain and Palin have had their turns, so who next. Obama. If this dies fast enough then a few days before the election the Republican rumour mill will churn out sleaze on Biden's affair.
A lady (well we still have conventional sleaze mongering, next election it will be a homosexual relationship of choice) who is a super fundraiser has been suggested.
She had a lucrative business going in Washington D.C. and suddenly closed shop and disappeared to an island in the Caribbean. All very hush hush, the type of behavior that brings dirt diggers out of the dungheap.
Vera Baker worked as a fundraiser on Barack Obama's staff during his senate campaign in 2004. She was apparently sidelined after Michelle Obama became uneasy over Barack Obama's friendship with Vera Baker.
the woman said that sha left the United State because she was in love with the man, who she is still living with. He is from the Caribbean island.
So far it seems mud is being thrown at Obama in the hope that some of it will stick.
John McCain is married to the woman had an affair with while married to his first wife.
When will the United States grow up and behave like a democracy? Surely there are more important issues than whether Sarah Palin uses lipstick or if she had her lips tattooed.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Last month, Random House, the United States publisher, decided to cancel publication of the book “The Jewel of Medina” as it feared the book could incite violence. This was after the book was quickly withdrawn from bookshops, in Serbia, after protests from the local Muslim community.
The British Gibson Square publishing house said it was imperative that “The Jewel of Medina” be available to the public and has published the book in the U.K. This resulted in an arson attack on the office of Gibson Square Publishing by three Muslim men.
Speaking on the subject of offending Muslims, the author said, "Anyone who reads the book will see that it honours the prophet and his favourite wife." This book, which has been described as a wonderful and inspiring love story, has evoked feelings reminiscent of the reaction to the Mohammad cartoons a couple of years ago.
Why is this? Is Islam such a week faith that words by a non-Muslim can strike right through the shield of their faith and actually hurt them?
Personally I respect believing Muslims, those who really follow their Faith. Yusuf Islam for example. I understand and empathise with Muslims who feel offended by statements made by non-Muslims in Europe and the United States. As a fundamentalist Christian, or a Christian holding to the fundamentals of the Christian Faith, I am deeply offended by statements made daily in the media and on television programs, such as “The Daily Show” and “The Colbert Report.”
Similarly I know I would feel offended by the film “Religulous” directed by Bill Maher. That is why I will not go to see it. I expect a large part of the film will be legitimate criticism of cult like behaviour by religious hypocrites, but seeing the filmmakers mock hypocrites and lumping them together with people with real Faith would sadden me. I feel sorry for Bill Maher, that he is unable to comprehend the difference between religious traditions and Faith.
The response from a spiritually mature person, who has his or her identity firmly in his or her Faith, should be to have pity on the poor ignorant humanistic souls, and pray for them. They are so far away from God, they have no concept of a relationship with God. To expect them to understand Faith is absurd.
Jon Stewart, who hosts the “Daily Show,” needs prayer badly. The poor man does not understand his own faith, Judaism. He lives in New York so it should not be too difficult to find some good Chassidic courses. Once he has grasped the fundamentals of Chabad Chassidism, with that newfound insight into reality, he might then look into the New Testament. There he could then see that Chabad Chassidism is soooo close to Christ, who is after all the long awaited Messiah and the one and only true Tzadik in the history of Judaism. After that long journey he might be ripe for accepting Christ as his Saviour. Jon Stewart accepting Allah is another issue.
If Muslims believe in their faith, have confidence in their faith and believe their own personal faith is strong, why not challenge Christians and Jews to pray for the blasphemers' souls. Have a prayer challenge like Elijah on Mt Carmel. Reference is 1 Kings Chapter 18, and for our Jewish friends M'lakhim Chapter 18. Then we maybe will see Jon Stewart hosting the “Daily Religious Hour,” or something similar.
Jesus, on the cross, looked at the people who had been baying for their Messiah's blood and said, “Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do.”
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Christianity has been through its dark days. Those were the times when the Church was a secular power and not following Christ. By definition a Christian must be a follower of Christ, otherwise the person is something else, an Arminianist, Calvinist, Lutheran, Wesleyan or follower of some other man’s interpretations. Those dark times were marked by a spiritually weak Church, and in fear banned the reading or possession of the Bible.
It appears Islam is in such a dark period, if their paranoia is anything to go by.
The mandatory death penalty in Iran, for a Muslim turning to any other faith seems quite out of proportion to the “threat” Christianity poses for Shiite Islam in Iran.
Other countries in the region show a similar paranoia. Not only Bahá'í, Christians and Jews are thrown into jail in the region. In Pakistan, a country President Bush counts as a friendly country, they have laws even against Muslim denominations. Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan who believe that their 19th century founder was a prophet have been, by law, declared non-Muslims for the last 34 years. Ahmadis who even name their sons Muhammad face imprisonment for blasphemy.
For the record, a list of the countries considered worst cases for not abiding with freedom of religion:
Afghanistan, Algeria, Belarus, Burma, China, Egypt, Eritrea, India, Iran, Indonesia, Jordan, Kosovo, Laos, Maldives, Mali, Myanmar, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Vietnam.
It appears, except for Myanmar (Burma), which is a special case, and India with Hindu extremists attacking Christians, Dalits and Muslims, all with equal vengeance, these countries fall into two groups. Communist (or that way inclined) and predominantly Muslim.
The best Muslim countries in this regard are Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia and Turkey. All show official religious intollerance.
Now is this a coincidence, or is Islam at heart insecure and violent?
Is Islam a faithless faith? A faith without faith in itself?
In 2007 a group Christian leaders met with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad while he was in New York to attend the United Nations General Assembly. They defended the meeting saying they wished to promote dialogue as an alternative to military confrontation.
In a church hall across from the U.N. they held a warm and friendly exchange. President Ahmadinejad is an intelligent and knowledgeable man. He is respectful, cordial and even witty. He spoke about the unity of the Judaic, Christian and Islamic messages. The meeting went off very well. President Ahmadinejad knows how to use every opportunity to his advantage.
This week President Ahmadinejad is once again in New York to speak in front of the U.N. general Assembly. The same group of Ecumenical Christian leaders are going to meet him again for dinner and dialogue, on Thursday the 25th September. This will take place during an iftar, the traditional meal served during Ramadan to break the fast.
The difference this time, is Iran passed legislation two weeks ago outlawing converting to the Christian Faith, with the death penalty as mandatory punishment. Yet these Christian leaders are naive enough to think they can have a positive influence.
The Iranian Parliament voted on September 9th in favour of the legislation with 196 votes in favour, seven against, and two abstentions. Included in the law are a list of crimes for which the death penalty is applied, are having blogs and websites promoting corruption, prostitution, and apostasy (read Christianity). The law mandates the death penalty for apostates. For anyone converting from Islam to any other religion, there is only one punishment, the death sentence.
For a person born to Muslim parents there is only a death penalty waiting. For a person born to non-Muslim parents, there is a three day period after sentencing when the person will be encouraged to change their mind. If the person still refuses then the death penalty is to be carried out.
Two Christians, Mahmoud Mohammad Matin-Azad, 53, and Arash Ahmad-Ali Basirat, 40, who are both Christian converts from Islam, were charged with apostasy last week at the Public and Revolutionary Court in Shiraz, Iran. They are awaiting the court’s verdict. They have been in detention since May 15.
In August, there were five known arrests of Iranian Christians in three cities by authorities, according to the persecution watchdog agency Compass Direct News. Among those arrested was Ramtin Soodmand, who is the son of the last Christian convert to be executed for leaving Islam, on Aug. 21.
Sharia laws vary from region to region. There is a tendency to cherry pick verses for support according to the ideas of the more senior leaders. Two basic rules of Bible interpretation are; a text out of context is a pretext, and the Bible does not contradict itself. The last one means if one finds a contradiction, then there is a misunderstanding/misinterpretation somewhere. This has as an obvious presupposition the Bible is God's word.
Assuming from a Muslim perspective that the Koran is Allah's word, and using the same basic rules, then these anti Christian laws should be explained in the context of the following two passages in the Koran. There are many other similar passages in the Koran.
Sura 3 Al-Imran verse 50: (Jesus speaking)
Sura 5 Al-Ma'idah, Allah says in the 46th and 47th verses: (‘We’ is Allah)
‘And I (Jesus) have come confirming that which was before me of the Torah, and to make lawful to you part of what was forbidden to you, and I have come to you with a proof from your Lord. So fear Allah and obey me.’
These verses are conveniently ignored.
‘We sent 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary), confirming the Torah that had come before him, and We gave him the Injeel (Gospel), in which was guidance and light and confirmation of the Torah that had come before it, a guidance and an admonition for the pious.
Let the people of the Injeel (Gospel) judge by what Allah has revealed therein.
There are other people from other faiths such as Bahá'ís in Iranian Islamic jails for their faith.
The “Christian” participants are the American Friends Service Committee, Mennonite Central Committee, Quaker UN Office, Religions for Peace, and the World Council of Churches UN Liaison.
A major protest will be held on Thursday 25th September at 6pm, to counter the meeting with these “Christian” leaders, across the street from the Grand Hyatt Hotel East 42nd Street, near Lexington Avenue and Grand Central Station in New York City.