Mother in Tulay Goren 'honour killing' tells of daughter's last day

How can a MOTHER watch her own child be abused that way is unspeakable to me.  This is your flesh and blood laying there tied up.  These are lives at least.  I'm not that girls mother, sister, or family.  I can't imagine passing someone in the street being abused that way and not DO something.  My dog, had puppies.  Two died.  She had had a litter of 13 and 2 of them died.  I tried putting those under a bush pretty far from the house.  She wound up dragging the poor little body back and tried to revive it by licking.  This went on for 3 days.  After that it took me driving pretty far so that she could not drag the bodies back.  THAT is a MOTHER.  What on EARTH is this peice of garbage?  What kind of women are these?  To call them animals is debasing good animals.  It's insulting to the animal kingdom.  Evil!
A tearful mother today described finding her teenage daughter tied up on a bedroom floor the day before the schoolgirl was allegedly murdered by her father in an “honour killing”.

Hanim Goren told the Old Bailey that her daughter Tulay’s hands and feet were bound so tightly that they had turned purple.



She said that her husband, Mehmet, told her that he had tied the 15-year-old girl up to stop her from running away.



Tulay had agreed to return to her home in Woodford Green, northeast London, in January 1999 after disgracing her family by living with a boyfriend twice her age, the jury was told.



Related Links

'Honour killing' wife breaks decades of silence

'Honour killing girl' may have been pregnant

'Honour killing girl warned boyfriend of trap’

Mrs Goren, 45, has broken a 10-year silence to give evidence against her husband and his brothers Ali, 55, and Cuma, 42, who are accused of her daughter’s murder, the court has heard.



She said that she had returned home with another daughter, Hatice, 13, to find her husband and Cuma Goren sitting downstairs without Tulay on January 6, 1999.



“When we couldn’t see her downstairs, Hatice and I ran up the stairs straight away,” she told the court, speaking through a Turkish interpreter.



“In the children’s bedroom I saw Tulay lying on the floor face down. Her hands and her feet were tied up. Her hands and her feet were all a purple, black colour, tied,” she told the court. “Tulay said, ‘Mum, don’t untie, I want to die’.”



Mrs Goren said that she was crying as she tried to untie her daughter but that her husband ran upstairs and ordered her to stop.



“Mehmet said, ‘So that she doesn’t run away again, I tied her up’,” she told the court.



“Then after that I don’t know who untied her, whether it was Hatice, whether it was me or whether it was Mehmet himself, I don’t remember.”



That evening Mrs Goren invited a number of relatives to the house to discuss Tulay’s future, the court was told. Later she saw her daughter with her legs dangling from the window of an upstairs bathroom.



Mrs Goren said that she spent the night with her husband and daughter in the living room.



“I brought a cushion and a blanket and I put the cushion on the floor and made her lie down. She slept there,” said Mrs Goren.



“Mehmet slept on the sofa. He pulled the armchair in front of the door so that the door wouldn’t open.



“I put my head on Tulay’s feet and legs and I just lay down on the carpet and slept like that.”



Mrs Goren said that the following day her husband ordered her to leave the house with her two youngest children. As she left the house she had a final conversation with Tulay.



“I was very angry and very cross with her,” Mrs Goren told the court.



Jurors have been told that Tulay went missing in January 1999 and her body has never been found.



Mehmet Goren and his brothers Ali and Cuma, both of Walthamstow, East London, deny murdering Tulay on January 7, 1999. They also deny conspiracy to murdering her boyfriend Hilal Unal between May 1998 and February 1999.

Human Rights are being challenged - Freedom of speech - An ANTI free speech resolution cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt

The title says it all.  This is a sad thing to see in the US.  I am disheartened. 

Free Speech Under Foreign Assault – by Robert Spencer

Posted by Robert Spencer on Oct 9th, 2009 and filed under FrontPage. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
Robert Spencer is a scholar of Islamic history, theology, and law and the director of Jihad Watch. He is the author of eight books, eleven monographs, and hundreds of articles about jihad and Islamic terrorism, including the New York Times Bestsellers The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades) and The Truth About Muhammad. His latest book, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to the Koran, is available now from Regnery Publishing.

Does the United States Constitution protect the freedom of speech of American citizens, or does it not? In this era of globalization, the answer is becoming increasingly muddled. Thursday, an American citizen, Paul Williams, went on trial in Canada. He is charged with violating Canadian libel laws in charges he made in his book The Dunces of Doomsday about a jihad terror cell at McMaster University in Ontario. Likewise in Brazil, an American business writer, Joseph Sharkey, is on trial for what he wrote about Brazilian air-traffic controllers after he survived an airplane crash in Brazil.

Williams and Sharkey both live in the United States, which guarantees that its citizens’ freedom of speech not be infringed. Should Canadian and Brazilian libel laws apply to them? Williams has already had to pay enormous amounts of money for his defense, and Sharkey is likely to be found guilty and given a $500,000 fine. McMaster University wants a cool two million dollars from Williams.
Shouldn’t the United States government protect American citizens from such bullying by foreign powers?
If nothing is done, the problem is certain to get worse — for Williams and Sharkey are not the first American victims of the tactic that has come to be known as “libel tourism.” The late Saudi billionaire Khalid Salim bin Mahfouz sued Rachel Ehrenfeld, founder and director of the American Center for Democracy, several years ago. Bin Mahfouz was upset about Ehrenfeld’s book, Funding Evil, in which she wrote that he was involved in funding Hamas and al Qaeda – a charge for which there was abundant evidence from Western intelligence agencies. Nevertheless, taking advantage of British libel laws that place the burden of proof on the defendant, rather than the plaintiff, bin Mahfouz sued not in the United States, where Ehrenfeld lives and published her book, but in Britain, where neither he nor Ehrenfeld lived and where his entire case depended upon a handful of copies sold in that country mostly through special orders from Amazon.com, and the appearance of one chapter of the book on the Internet, where could have been read by British readers. A British court awarded bin Mahfouz $250,000, and Ehrenfeld had to devote the bulk of her time for years to fighting this judgment.

Now Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) has introduced the Free Speech Protection Act of 2009, which would shelter American writers from libel judgments by courts in countries that do not value the freedom of speech the way America does. But this bill faces an uphill battle – it seems unlikely that Barack Obama will give it his support after he just last week had the United States co-sponsor an anti-free speech resolution at the United Nations. Approved by the U.N. Human Rights Council, the resolution, cosponsored by the U.S. and Egypt, calls on states to condemn and criminalize “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence.”


“Hatred” and “incitement” are, of course, in the eye of the beholder — or more precisely, in the eye of those who make such determinations. The powerful can decide to silence the powerless by classifying their views as “hate speech.” The ability to dissent, publicly and without fear of imprisonment or other reprisal, is a cornerstone of any genuinely free society. Yet no less distinguished a personage than the President of the United States has now given his imprimatur to the quashing of such dissent.

But we still have the First Amendment, right? Legal expert Eugene Volokh explains that it isn’t that easy: “If the U.S. backs a resolution that urges the suppression of some speech, presumably we are taking the view that all countries — including the U.S. — should adhere to this resolution. If we are constitutionally barred from adhering to it by our domestic constitution, then we’re implicitly criticizing that constitution, and committing ourselves to do what we can to change it.”


Is that the change that Americans were hoping for when they voted for Barack Obama in such large numbers in 2008? Specter and the other Democrats who have introduced and support the Free Speech Protection Act should recognize how inconsistent it is with their own party leader’s actions as President of the United States, and call upon him to end all support for any legal measure anywhere that restricts free speech.


Our survival as a free people could depend upon it.

Barack Obama must attend climate change talks to avoid 'catastrophe' for the planet

This is what Lord Monckton was talking to Bethel U. students about.  He's been trying to get a debate going with Al Gore.  He's also been shut up by the democrats for trying to get a voice of opposition. 
http://opntalk.blogspot.com/2009/04/lord-christopher-monckton-barred-from.html

Washington, DC -- UK's Lord Christopher Monckton, a former science advisor to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, claimed House Democrats have refused to allow him to appear alongside former Vice President Al Gore at a high profile global warming hearing on Friday April 24, 2009 at 10am in Washington. Monckton told Climate Depot that the Democrats rescinded his scheduled joint appearance at the House Energy and Commerce hearing on Friday. Monckton said he was informed that he would not be allowed to testify alongside Gore when his plane landed from England Thursday afternoon.
“The House Democrats don't want Gore humiliated, so they slammed the door of the Capitol in my face,” Monckton told Climate Depot in an exclusive interview. “They are cowards.”
Yes they are. And this is not just a claim, this is a FACT.
According to Monckton, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), Ranking Member on the Energy & Commerce Committee, had invited him to go head to head with Gore and testify at the hearing on Capitol Hill Friday. But Monckton now says that when his airplane from London landed in the U.S. on Thursday, he was informed that the former Vice-President had “chickened out” and there would be no joint appearance. Gore is scheduled to testify on Friday to the Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment's fourth day of hearings on the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009. The hearing will be held in 2123 Rayburn House Office Building.
According to Monckton, House Democrats told the Republican committee staff earlier this week that they would be putting forward an unnamed 'celebrity' as their star witness Friday at a multi-panel climate hearing examining the House global warming bill. The "celebrity" witness turned out to be Gore. Monckton said the GOP replied they would respond to the Democrats' "celebrity" with an unnamed "celebrity" of their own. But Monckton claims that when the Democrats were told who the GOP witness would be, they refused to allow him to testify alongside Gore.
[ Update: 1:55 PM EST: A GOP House source told Climate Depot that the Democrats on the Committee said “absolutely not” to allowing Monckton to appear during today's Gore hearing. The GOP committee “pushed at multiple levels” to bring Monckton in to testify but the Democrats “refused,” according to the GOP source. Former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich was called in to testify after Monckton was rejected by the committee Democrats, according to the Congressional source.]
“The Democrats have a lot to learn about the right of free speech under the US Constitution. Congress Henry Waxman's (D-CA) refusal to expose Al Gore's sci-fi comedy-horror testimony to proper, independent scrutiny by the House minority reeks of naked fear,” Monckton said from the airport Thursday evening.

“Waxman knows there has been no 'global warming' for at least a decade. Waxman knows there has been seven and a half years' global cooling. Waxman knows that, in the words of the UK High Court judge who condemned Gore's mawkish movie as materially, seriously, serially inaccurate, 'the Armageddon scenario that he depicts is not based on any scientific view,'” Monckton explained. Monckton has previously testified before the House Committee in March. (See: Monckton: Have the courage to do nothing...US Congress told climate change is not real ) Monckton has also publicly challenged Gore to a debate. (See: Al Gore Challenged to International TV Debate on Global Warming By Lord Monckton - March 19, 2007
A call to the Democratic office of the House Energy and Commerce Committee seeking comment was not immediately returned Thursday night.

Freedom of speech is not something necessary here.  After all it's not polite speech.  But to who or whom is he not polite.  The hardcore scientists have been overridden by the politicians who think that it's inconvenient truth. 

Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy- amounting to legalizing POT

This policy amouts to making Pot legal.  This has nothing to do with STATES rights.  It has to do with weather we, as Americans, want to make DRUGS legal.  Medical pot is nothing but a hoax.  There are drugs out there that have THC in them and they don't make you high, but do have the same "medicinal" effect.  Medical pot is a non issue.  It should not be legal.  It is a very dangerous drug.  This administrations view on it is irrelevant.  The fact that this in effect make POT legal is a miscarriage of justice.  This administration is playing games with the law.  This might be something that YOU personally may agree with, but the idea is -
IF THEY CAN SCURMISH THE PEOPLE ON THIS ISSUE, THEN WHATS TO STOP THEM ON AN ISSUE THAT YOU MAY NOT AGREE WITH-
This is a absolute run away train administration.  We have NO control!

Feds to issue new medical marijuana policy-

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they closely conform to state laws.

The Justice Department is set to issue new policy guidelines on medical marijuana Monday. Two department officials described the new policy to the Associated Press, saying federal prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in compliance with state laws.
The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.
Vermont and Maine both allow the use of medical marijuana.

Ocean Lady- A ship carrying 76 suspected illegal migrants has been seized off Canada's Pacific coast

I remember that a few months ago there were some troops diverted from the Mexican border and put on the Candian border.  At the time I was asking myself why they would do something like that.  There was no reason.  But maybe there is.  But what would give officials in the Bush and Obama administration now pause to attend to the Candian border.  This may or may not be something to farther consider. 

Those on board the ship said they were trying to reach Canada, according to local authorities.




The identity of the migrants was not confirmed, although Canada's public safety minister said there were indications they were from Sri Lanka.



He said it appeared to be a case of human smuggling. The migrants, all men, were said to be in good health.



The merchant vessel, named Ocean Lady, was intercepted by a navy frigate off Vancouver Island before being escorted to a dock near Victoria, British Columbia.



Officials there were carrying out health and safety and immigration checks.



Those on board the ship were pictured wearing civilian clothes. Some were shirtless.



"The signs do point toward human smuggling," said the public safety minister, Peter Van Loan.



Several ships attempting to smuggle migrants from China to Canada's Pacific coast were intercepted off Vancouver Island a decade ago.