Editorial: Ban Italian Football from Europe!

The scene on Wednesday was horrific.

During Wednesday's Champions League game between AS Roma and Manchester United, Italian Police - without cause - beat and brutalized Manchester United fans (see pic to the right - courtesy the Daily Express). Another fan was stabbed near Roma's Olympic Stadium. About 18 fans required medical treatment due to crazed Italian fans with many more leaving with minor injuries, and shattered nerves.

Overshadowing what was a first-rate Champions League game (with Roma winning 2-1 over United), the incidents have moved world-wide attention away from clean and exciting competition to anarchy on Roman streets. During the game, AS Roma's fan threw glass bottles containing urine and other objects over the plastic barriers, while Italian Police did nothing. In fact, reports clearly showed that Italian Police stationed themselves only within the Manchester United fan area, and not in the Italian section from where the dangerous objects were being thrown.

No one knows for sure why Italian Police decided to attack Manchester United fans, but the videos and facts support that it was clearly unprovoked. Manchester United, so concerned about matter, has set up a fan inquiry line, and those who were assaulted or attacked can be directed to : roma@manutd.co.uk or by mail to Roma Inquiry, Manchester United FC, Sir Matt Busby Way, Manchester, M14 0RA.

After this and other incidents, its time for the UEFA to step in and declare that Italian venues are unsafe for all soccer fans. The UEFA must take steps to immediately ban Italy from European competition and perhaps even their own interleague games for the safety of all involved.

Italian Football (Soccer) has long been scrutinized for the violent and unruly behavior displayed by their fans. In fact, due to the behavior of some Italian fans with teams playing in Serie A, many teams such as Catania must play in closed stadiums without fans. So this means that many Serie A games can be seen on TV being played with empty stadiums. It's a well known fact that Italian Football officials refuse to govern themselves accordingly, or provide realistic and consistent sanctions and punishments for unruly fans.

There is precedence for shutting down an entire nation's football league until they solve for security issues. UEFA and other organizations successfully shut down English Football in 1985 when the Heysel (Brussels) stadium tragedy occurred in which 39 fans died during a match between Liverpool and Juventus for the European Championship.

England took the right steps to ensure that hooliganism was reduced to a minimum, and the correct number of police, and crowd control procedures and equipment where put into place. The ban was lifted after a full five years and after England could demonstrate to UEAF and local government officials that venues were safe and England could better manage soccer fans.

The fear is that Serie A and Italian Government officials apparently need their own tragic Heysel incident before they take the time to clean up their act. Or perhaps a better alternative is for English, French, German, and other European nations simply take the step to protect their fans by refusing to play Italian teams in European competition until Italy reforms itself.

At least for now, let's hope that when AS Roma comes to Old Trafford, England to play the final leg against Manchester United on April 10th, that Manchester United fans don't retaliate and conduct themselves in a manner that blurs the issue and takes the light of scrutiny off of Italian League soccer - where it clearly belongs.

I also recommend you read this great piece by ESPN's Jon Carter.

On April 10th, even if you hate Manchester United, the world's fans owe allegiance to the Red Devils, and pray they knock Roma out of the competition, if not for anything else - for the safety of Soccer fans everywhere!

UEFA shut down Italy!

ABC should fire Rosie O'Donnell!

ABC has reached a new low.

In fact, if ABC would step away from their money-grubbing concerns about increasing viewership through controversy for a moment, then they would see that they should be down-right embarrassed by the negative image that their employee, Rosie O'Donnell, is giving the network.

On March 23, fifteen British Sailors assigned to the British frigate H.M.S. Cornwall, operating under United Nations mandate to patrol the waters between Iran and Iraq, were captured in Iranian waters, and are currently being held hostage, paraded around, and humiliated by the Iranian Government. These servicemen were not engaged in any acts of war or hostility, but rather were in the process of finishing up the inspection of an Indian-flagged cargo vessel thought have been illegally smuggling/ transporting automobiles. An accurate and fair run down of events can be found here.

The Iranians have a history of taking hostages; we all remember how Americans were taken hostage in November of 1979, and released upon the election of Ronald W. Reagan (who would have probably decimated Iran had the stand-off continued) in 1981, and more recently June 21, 2004, when Iranians took eight British serviceman hostage for three days.

Any normal person would recognize that taking 15 people hostage is an act of terror, if not an act of war. And any normal person would recognize the severity of the situation, and the fact that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a madman, hell-bent on developing Nuclear Weapons in order to dominate the Gulf region, and intimidate the world. Any intelligent person recognizes that if the situation continues to escalate that these 15 British service personnel might never see their families again. And among them is 26-year old mother of one, Faye (Topsy) Turney, who if you haven't noticed - is shamefully and under duress being used by Iran to write letters of apology, and letters implying British guilt. Any normal person that is... but not fat, pathetic Rosie.

O'Donnell, is co-host of the downward spiraling show The View, and is well known for her open homosexuality and liberal activism. ABC Television hired O'Donnell in order to increase ratings by allowing her to run her mouth unchecked, spewing her controversial (and vocally obnoxious) attacks on everything, including current events, and individual people . Over the past several months, she started feuds with Star Jones and Donald Trump, and she has been heard attacking American Idol, the Chinese Language, Kelly Ripa, President Bush, Carl Rove, and under false pretenses during an interview - even Pearl Harbored poor Tom Selleck (Magnum PI) - because he is a gun owner and a quiet conservative, and she's even gone so far as to use ABC as a platform to suggest an all-out U.S. conspiracy regarding the 9/11 attacks. All that's apparently fine and dandy with ABC execs who say nothing. Well all this criticism of others is expected particularly considering her low self-esteem, weight problem, career failure, and alternative lifestyle choice.

But this week, she went too far.

She blamed entire hostage crisis on the British Government, and implied that the British were instigating a war by staging the whole thing. Her quotes on her website go further, she writes "the British did it on purpose... ". Completely ridiculous charges which have been confirmed false. Just what the friends and families of the innocents being held, and viewers want to hear - another conspiracy against the Government. Another dotted line reason to hate Bush, etc, etc.

And yet ABC - and especially Barbara Walters (who has lost all respectability since she's allowed Rosie to regularly spout off unchecked) doesn't seem to have the courage to challenge her on the facts, or even provide an alternative viewpoint. And shame on you , Barbara. You used to be a reputable and fair-minded journalist - and yet, you just sit there. Wow. Afraid to say something, or do you agree with Rosie's rambling idiocy? Or does ABC, the network that prides itself on "World News Tonight" endorse Rosie's political agenda?

The following is a copy of the transcript from The View regarding the British hostage crisis:

O'DONNELL: But what's interesting with the British sailors, there were 15 British sailors and Marines who apparently went into Iranian waters and they were seized by the Iranians. And I have one thing to say: Gulf of Tonkin, Google it.

Then the following exchange occurred:

O'DONNELL: Yes, but it’s very interesting too that, you know, these guys, they went into the water by mistake right at a time when British and American, you know, they're two, they’re pretty much our biggest ally and we're considering whether or not we should go into war with Iran.
BEHAR: But the U.N. was about to sanction them, also have an embargo against Iran. And the, and the timing [unintelligible] so they distracted the whole world with this.
ELISABETH HASSELBECK: Right and they may be about to expel the inspectors right now, too, which could be considered [unintelligible]
O’DONNELL: Right or it could be just the Gulf of Tonkin, which you should all Google.

Video here.

It's funny she says at the end of the segway, "I find it's important to Google 'cause you can find out things you wouldn't find out on national TV." Sure. I recommend Googling "Rosie O'Donnell", then you can find out all kinds of things about this fat traitor who ABC television has granted an unchallenged political platform in which to spew hate and lies.

It's true that Rosie know little, but she knows a lot about liberal activism, she once said on The View: "Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America," that the U.S. government "robbed" terrorists including Khalid Sheikh Mohammed "of his humanity..." Yeah right. Now we are robbing terrorists of their humanity - like that makes sense. In Rosie's backwards world, the United States and the Christians are the terrorist, and the Islamic Fundamentalist and their villainous hordes who suicide bomb and murder innocent victims are simply misunderstood heroes. Enough! What kind of person says this stuff?

For months we've heard about the O'Donnell's battles with Donald Trump. Rosie attacked Trump for giving Miss USA Tara Conner a second chance after her public mistakes. Of all people, O'Donnell should be the last one to criticize anyone considering that she's one big public blunder. And her life is one big lie.

What's also interesting is that since January The View has lost about a half million viewers. If the American Broadcasting Company keeps it up, they may find themselves missing sponsors too.

ABC Television - Do the right thing, and Fire Rosie! Or face the fact that she's become ABC's (and ABC's sponsor's) mouthpiece.

And you can do your part by letting ABC and it's sponsors understand your outrage:

Send a letter to:
ABC, Inc.
500 S. Buena Vista Street
Burbank, CA 91521-4551

Or leave a message by calling: (818) 460-7477*

Don't expect a reply, but they do pay attention to viewer opinion since ultimately, viewers by the products sold by the sponsors who pay for the programming aired.

Whilst I ponder... the Episcopal Church's unfortunate Saga

I've been quiet over the past week contemplating specifics around my upcoming piece on the Episcopal Church, and it's current state of bitter turmoil.

I find the ongoing saga in the Church almost intolerable, particularly as it relates to the instigators and perverse activists, who are pushing their ridiculous pro-gay agenda on the vast majority of the Anglican Communion. They clearly don't care about the incredible harm they are causing - not to just thousands, but millions of Anglican parishioners around the globe. They seem to deem success by the level of destruction they cause to the existing institution - that in itself is a revealing fact. It shows that their agenda takes precedence over the institution. After all, they've chosen this Church - an established Church - to attack to make their points. Certainly, they could have started their own Church with their own doctrine with its own set of principles and ideals, but instead they intentionally chose to infiltrate and dismantle OUR Church. In their eyes, to decimate a long standing institution, is a victory of immense proportion.

Somewhere someone with the best of intentions felt overcome with compassion and pity, and opened the door to these agenda-driven activists. And like the Trojan Horse they entered quietly at first... and now they and their friends are running your church committees, parishes, and voting at the Episcopal Church conventions to reverse centuries of accepted doctrine. They are working tirelessly to undermine the very organization that provided them comfort and kindness.

It's amazing that blatant liberalism has crept into our institutions with such astounding success. But then again, perhaps not, since traditionalists tend to be on the lazy side when it comes to defending things such as traditional values and institutions. They expect things to be as they always were, and would rather stay above the frey instead of engaging in the debate. And that is the weakness that is exploited every time by the foes of civilization.

I understand that most people simply don't want to be bothered. Most people steer clear of controversy and argument. Successful people, who are generally traditional and conservative by nature, are too busy making money, living in traditional families, and doing the things that everyone aught to being doing. Whereas, liberals, freethinkers, and the like have plenty of time on their hands to waste. They are often in turmoil and self-doubt, and there are usually questions about the soundness of their state of mind. They are truly focused on "self" - as in "jealousy" of others who have [insert whatever they are missing here: love, job, house, opportunity, money, etc], while they have not. These people are hell-bent on turning right into wrong, and wrong into right in the name of alleged "social justice" or "fairness" and whatever justifying feel- good cliche they can think of.

Of course, the underlying quest is to make others believe that what is bizarre and unnatural is somehow normal and natural. The very notion of getting them to accept that there may be something wrong within their own psyche and behavior would be to get them to admit to abnormality, or worse - even mental sickness. Herein you can see the internal driver that propels these people to push their agenda to the limits - it's their own internal rage, and their need to feel justified in what they choose to do or how they choose to act.

The battle in the Episcopal Church is a prime example of this kind of behavior. In the end, the liberal activists want to blur the lines of right and wrong, and reduce sin to mere error so they can legitimize their own perverse actions as acceptable and normal. If everything is subjective, then there can be no standards, no rules, and no moral highgrounds. They want to reduce the Bible to a book of suggestions, turn God into a man-made creation so they can declare that God's teachings are not universal laws but rather human ideas no better than their own. And in their eyes, since God is man-made, and man is prone to mistakes and imperfections, then God is imperfect, and all notions of right and wrong are replaced with relativism. The Bible is therefore reduced to nothing more than a book of interesting tales with no merit, and with nothing to teach, and with no binding covenant.

So it's full circle for these liberal terrorists: Infiltrate, dismantle, destroy, and redefine.

And this is what those advocating homosexual unions are doing to the Episcopal Church, and perhaps even the Anglican Communion. And once they have won this battle, they will continue down the path toward total separation from God, leaving behind the institution in total ruin.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note: Yes, the Episcopal Shield above is intentionally being printed upside down. In days of old (and as is still taught in Nautical Safety courses) when a flag is flown upside down, it's is a symbol of distress. Our Episcopal Church is clearly in a state of distress, and the emblem is therefore being printed as a symbol to reflect as such.

New Connecticut Episcopal Bishop's Election is Cause for Concern; Courant article misrepresented the facts.

If you missed it last week, the Hartford Courant published a story that completely missed the mark on it's reporting of the recent election for Bishop in the (Episcopal) Diocese of Connecticut held on Saturday, March 10, 2007. While the Courant came across as giddy and distracted by the election of the first female Episcopal Bishop, Laura Ahrens, it failed to report that the election was far from a slam-dunk. And moreover, it didn't report the details which clearly highlight that only due to some clever eleventh hour election-engineering by "politicos" at the Diocese, Ahrens may not have ever been elected.

Surprisingly, the detailed election results by ballot can be found on the Diocese website election results page. The fact is that during the first round, Rev. Canon Thomas Furrer won the majority vote of the Clergy by a count of 83 votes; he also overwhelming won the Lay vote by capturing 101 votes (with Ahrens coming in distant second with a mere 68 votes). The fact is that Furrer was clearly the first choice by the Laity in the first, second, third and fourth rounds of balloting. And despite the political climate, Furrer also took the majority vote of the Clergy during the first three ballots.

It wasn't until the Diocese leadership persuaded Dr. Barbara Cheyney and the remaining candidates to throw their votes to Ahrens that Ahrens finally pulled out the victory in the fifth and final round. She won the Clergy vote 145-98, and the Laity vote 139-118.

Rev. Mark Pendleton, Dean of Christ Church Cathedral, and the man who nominated Ahrens for the post is quoted in the article as saying, ""I think it really demonstrated that the desire for a female bishop is really what moved this process." That looks good in the press from his political standpoint, however - the reality is that without some arm twisting, and a nod here, and a wink there, there is no telling how this election might have gone.

And considering the state of upheaval and disunity in the Connecticut Diocese under Bishop Andrew Smith, and his servant Bishop James Curry, it was a foregone conclusion that the only electable candidate would had to have been someone close to them in liberal political thinking, who was blindly willing to spearhead their pro-gay rights agenda. With that in mind, Canon Furrer didn't have a snowball's chance in Hell of winning this election. Furthermore, several blogs reported (and predicted accurately) that due to her "insider status" that Laura Ahrens had won the election long before the nomination process officially started.

It's disappointing that Courant which considers itself the "newspaper of record" seemed to neither mention Furrer by name and his initial balloting victories, nor the fact that Ahrens' long-time, close working relationship with Curry and Smith made her a lock for the win. The only thing really shocking about this election, is how long it took for the Smith/Curry/Ahrens team to pool together the majority to engineer the win.

As a subnote, I'm in the process of writing an in-depth essay at the state of the Episcopal Church. Because it's a complicated, personally emotional, and difficult article to write, I anticipate that it will take some time before its ready for public viewing.