Read it all. Best part is when he told them he could not possibly be raaaaacist since “he is married to a black woman”.
There’s tough competition for the most insane group on the whacked-out looney left, but any shortlist for that dubious distinction must include the gang of kooks going under the moniker “Queers Undermining Israeli Terror”, a.k.a. “Queers for Palestine”, a.k.a. “Chickens for Colonel Sanders”. My blog-ancestor chronicles their latest antics in his/her latest report, which is — believe it or not — against a film festival focusing on “ghey” culture in Israel.
QUIT is accusing Israel of “pinkwashing” its treatment of Palestinians by promoting how gay-friendly the nation is while sweeping under the rug its “apartheid policies” toward Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza. I invite you to read QUIT’s manifesto above and try to wrap your mind around their point of view — which may not be an easy task. Note how QUIT in no way disputes the fact that Israel is queer-friendly; nor do they dispute the fact that gays in Palestine generally face immediate execution (by mob violence, government dictate, or even at the hands of their own families) if ever found out. Mostly, QUIT conveniently fails to mention what happens to gays in Palestine, but to the extent that they do mention it, they lay the blame on Israel. QUIT’s “logic” goes like this: Israel has the Palestinians trapped like rats in a cage, and it is this desperate social condition which causes Palestinian society to become so twisted that it oppresses its own people; furthermore, by closing the borders, Israel prevents gay Palestinians from fleeing the horrors of Palestine for the freedom of . . . Israel.
Of course, my analysis is this: The members of QUIT are in a “hipper-than-thou” arms race with other far-left radicals, and realized that if they want to be at the forefront of leftist political activism, they absolutely need to be anti-Israel and pro-Palestine, as that has become a defining feature of far-left ideologies. But as a gay rights group, QUIT was confronted by the deeply unfortunate fact that gays are safe, free and happy in Israel, while being oppressed, closeted and/or dead in Palestine. Other far-left groups coped with this problematic political conundrum by studiously ignoring the whole issue, thus obviating the need to resolve it. QUIT, on the other hand, uniquely has attempted to address the issue head on. Yet in order to somehow justify being pro-Palestine while at the same time supporting gay rights, QUIT necessarily needed to engage in the most ludicrous philosophical gymnastics in order to find some way to reconcile two irreconcilable positions.
But the end result is worse than QUIT could have imagined, because when all is said and done, they are promoting a society in which gays are simply not allowed to exist, and end up championing the grotesquely oppressive Arab/Islamic social order.
If QUIT truly cared about the rights of gays in Palestine and the Middle East, they would celebrate the treatment of gays in Israel and point to it as a model for other Middle Eastern countries to emulate. Instead of fighting for Arab self-rule in Palestinian territories — which would inevitably lead to a complete extirpation of all gay rights if not all gay people — QUIT should take the position that Israel should administer the Palestinian territories, because only under Israeli rule could gay Palestinians have any chance of survival. And instead of advocating that Palestinians continue their violent confrontational stance against Israel, QUIT should absolutely insist on Palestinian non-violence, which would allow the endless Intifada to fade away, quell all terror incidents, and allow Israel to once again open the border to Palestinian day workers and immigrants — and allow gay Palestinians to escape to the freedom of Israeli society.
But no. QUIT does the exact opposite of all those things. Which makes them among the most mystifying, and in some ways, the most loathsome of all leftist protest groups.
UPDATE: a commenter there notes that just one block away, radical Islamists shot a homosexual man near a bar that, ironically, is called “Andalus” (the name Arabs give to the Iberian peninsula, which survives as the name of one region of Spain).
In my day job, I have known some scarily intelligent people that were however unable to distinguish between essentials and particulars, or to prioritize issues to deal with or work to do. (Others do so naturally, yet others have to be taught.) In politics, the way many American Jews of an older generation (generally not themselves looney-left liberal) are easily scared into voting Democrat might be one example. Likewise, at this stage, whatever the beef homosexuals have with residual “homophobia” in Israel is at the level of arguing about interior decoration while the house is on fire. Of course, assuming Q.U.I.T. to be even this rational is giving them more credit than they are worth.
Knock me over with a feather: former San Francisco mayor Willie Brown (!) is actually stating a hard truth about the civil service (h/t: Mickey Kaus):
In the category: “Reality outdoes satire” read this simultaneously hilarious and depressing account by Zombie of the latest ideological divisions in the West Coast (left)<super>5</super>anarchist movement. You’ll need Aspirin or Advil for headaches after reading it, though.
And supporting the wraparound theory of extremist political lunacy (a.k.a. the “konvergence of kooks”), Zombie introduces us all to the concept of “National Anarchism“.
Zombie’s parody “hockey stick” graph allegedly plotting AGW skepticism as a function of time looks surprisingly similar to… real Gallup poll data.
Strange but true.
Must-read: Victor Davis Hanson, “Dronism”, about how California got to where it is now. I can’t do it justice by selective quoting.
Not as a rhetorical term for draconian environmental policy, but as the real thing. Insty has a brief roundup:
[Daily Mail:] Enviros’ “Eliminationist Rhetoric” claims lives of parents, kids. “Argentines Francisco Lotero, 56, and Miriam Coletti, 23, shot their children before killing themselves after making an apparent suicide pact over fears about global warming.”
ANOTHER UPDATE: Blaming Al Gore? No.
After a year’s worth of unhinged lefties blaming conservative bloggers, pundits, and activists for every crime spree on the planet, it would be just deserts to blame Al Gore for the alleged global warming-inspired murders reported in the UK Daily Mail today. But count me out of that game. . . . In any case, Al Gore is responsible for enough fraud and misery without overreaching and laying this strange case at his feet.
Leave the hysterical smear-mongering to Frank Rich, Andrew Sullivan, Paul Krugman, and Keith Olbermann.
Well, they’ve had more practice.
Following the U. of Alabama “tenure denial massacre” by Amy Bishop [see here, here, here , and especially here, here, and here for our earlier coverage], the Chronicle of Higher Education has gathered a series of responses to the question: “Is tenure a matter of life and death?”
The answers of course generally reflect New Class sensibilities, but are generally well worth reading. The single most horrifying thing I read was quoted by KC Johnson (who had to suffer through quite a via dolorosa of his own to get tenure): “[…] as in American Association of University Professors President Cary Nelson’s recent claim that it was acceptable to consider a candidate’s personal or political views in the hiring process[…]”
Let me offer my own two cents on academic tenure. As I see it, it exists primarily for three reasons:
- Originally, it came about to protect scholars from being dismissed for stating views or findings that were impopular, ‘heretic’, ‘subversive’, or more than one of the above. (For example, ss incredible as this may sound to us today, the act of dissecting a corpse to see human anatomy with one’s own eyes rather than relying on the ancient writings of Galen, was once considered a subversive act.)
- In some technical and professional fields (e.g., law, some specialties of medicine, some fields of engineering,…) a practicing professional could earn many times over the salary of a professor. Tenure is perceived as one form of compensation for ceasing to practice in one’s specialty or working reduced hours in it.
- Finally, in many fields in the hard sciences, tenure is seen as giving scholars the chance to engage in high-risk, highly innovative, research that might pay off big time — or turn out to be a years-long wild goose chase with nothing to show for it. As the latter is obviously the ‘kiss of death’ in the absence of tenure, assistant professors on the tenure track tend to ‘play it safe’ by restricting their research to projects that have a reasonable chance of publishable outcomes.
In the American system, one typically becomes an assistant professor after a Ph.D. and at least one postdoctoral stint. One thus becomes an independent researcher and head of one’s own group (“captain of one’s own ship”) at a pretty young age, but without certainty of employment, and with the ‘Remember Tomorrow’ of a tenure decision ahead. There is no denying that it is a pretty stressful experience, not just for the academic but also for his/her partner: I’ve seen more than one marriage break up over this. But, of course, the payoff of success is a level of job security virtually unmatched in the USA outside government service.
However, many Euro countries have a different academic structure where there is a fairly large “NCO corps” in between the graduate students (and, in the last 20-30 years, postdocs) on the one hand, and the titular professors on the other hand. Anybody eyeing a spot in the “officer corps” needs to do their time in the NCO corps first, but tenure is reached after some years there, after which one finds oneself being groomed/in a ‘holding pattern’ for years (depending on one’s perspective) until a titular professor retires. Needless to say, this system is much less dynamic than the US one, and the reduced stress is outweighed by the frustration of possibly being stuck in an ‘NCO slot’ for decades, or even until retirement.
Israel has a US-style tenure system: it does have an ‘NCO corps’ of ‘staff scientists’ who however represent an alternate career path rather than an entrance hall to the faculty track. Also, further promotion (from associate professor to full professor) generally takes longer and is subject to closer scrutiny than in the US.
Germany and many Eastern European countries do their ‘faculty filtering’ in a different way than the USA: by demanding an additional credential for faculty in the guise of a Higher Doctorate (known as a Habilitation in Germany). This typically consists of a much heftier thesis than the original Ph.D., and is supposed to be a body of independent research (perhaps with some mentoring) rather than work carried out under the guidance of an advisor. France has a similar post-Ph.D. credential called “Habilitation à diriger des recherches” (accreditation to supervise research), which entitles the holder to act as the Ph.D. advisor to graduate students.
Each system has pluses and minuses. The Euro system is much less ‘sink or swim’ in that one is more gradually groomed for ‘captaincy’, and that job security is reached much more easily. On the other hand, many of Europe’s best and most dynamic researchers seek out academic positions in the USA precisely because of the greater independence and flexibility it affords. Yet on the third hand, dependence on grant money encourages faddishness in research, while somebody who does high-quality research in a ‘no longer fashionable’ subject may have a much easier time of it in France, Germany, Switzerland, or even Israel than in the USA. But on the fourth hand, this same set of circumstances may lead a researcher to remain ‘stuck in a rut’ rather than try to reinvent themselves.
Thomas Sowell’s famous aphorism, “There are no solutions, only trade-offs”, applies here as well.
Today the New York Times has a long in-depth story on the incident — if you can’t deal with the NYT’s registration wall, there is an apparently identical version online here, for instance. (In addition, a slightly different version at the Seattle Times incorporates some additional details — notably that Amy Bishop is a second cousin of writer — and whackjob — John Irving.)
While both versions are of course silent about Bishop’s far-left politics and obsession with 0bama, they are overall a pretty good recap of what we already know, plus add some new information:
- she had aspirations as a writer, and collaborated with somebody named Lenny Cavallero on an unpublished novel named “Amazon Fever”, “in which a herpes-like virus spreads throughout the world, causing pregnant women to miscarry”. Her co-author: “When I worked with her, I found she was always within striking distance of the edge”
- “Over the years, Dr. Bishop had shown evidence that the smallest of slights could set off a disproportionate and occasionally violent reaction, according to numerous interviews with colleagues and others who know her. Her life seemed to veer wildly between moments of cold fury and scientific brilliance, between rage at perceived slights and empathy for her students.”
- Somebody who collaborated with her on a paper in 1996 remembers her flying into a white-hot rage when she wasn’t given the coveted first author slot. “She broke down. She was extremely angry with all of us. She exploded into something emotional that we never saw before in our careers.”
- “She rejected criticism and fudged her résumé. Her scientific work was not as impressive as she made it seem, according to independent neurobiologists, some of whom said she would have been unlikely to even get the opportunity to try for tenure at major universities. [See also here — NCT.] She was known to have cyclical “flip-outs,” as one former student described them, that pushed one graduate student after another out of her laboratory.”
- Following the shooting of her brother, “as Officer Solimini and a partner drove Amy Bishop to the police station, she made a remark that surprised him, according to the report. “She stated that she had an argument with her father earlier,” Officer Solimini wrote. “(Prior to the shooting, she stated!)””
- “Dr. Bishop also arrived in Huntsville with a padded résumé, giving the impression that she had worked at Harvard two years longer than the university’s records indicate.” [This AP story also mentions that she claimed an IQ of 180 — which would be in the 99.99997th percentile!]
- “Graduate students did not last long in her laboratory, and those familiar with the department said that most transferred to a different one before completing their degree. In May 2006, she dismissed a graduate student from her lab. The student promised to return some notebooks and a set of keys the next day, a person familiar with the incident said, but Dr. Bishop called the campus police that night, according to a campus police report. The student filed a grievance against her.”
- when denied tenure, “Her attitude was not, ‘I’m going to have to go find another job,’ ” said Eric Seemann, an assistant professor of psychology. “It was more like, ‘When are these idiots going to clear this up?’ ”
- contrary to what has been claimed on some antisemitic conspiracy sites [which I refuse to link to], her father was not a Jewish business mogul but a professor of film at Northeastern University [this web page refers to Sam Bishop as Northeastern’s “one man film program” in the 1970s — there even appears to be a school award named after him at Northeastern], while her mother was involved in local politics in Braintree, MA, a middle-class suburb of Boston.
- the fatal shooting of her brother happened following an argument with her father, who was out on an Xmas shopping trip while it happened
If I’d have to venture an amateur psychological diagnosis, it would be an extreme form of narcissistic personality disorder (NPD — note all the incidents of “narcissistic rage”), possibly with borderline personality disorder (BPD) thrown in. (Both are “Cluster B personality disorders“.)
Some more information has emerged in the strange case of Amy Bishop, the assistant professor of biology who killed 3 and wounded 3 of her colleagues after she was denied tenure at U. of Alabama, Huntsville. [See here, here, here , and especially here for our earlier coverage.]
The Chronicle of Higher Education has a special section on the Huntsville shootings.
Some new information that has emerged:
- the VP for technology transfer of the university tried to calm Amy Bishop in a phone call about her future. In particular, “he tried to reassure an anxious Amy Bishop that she could keep working on inventions even if she lost her tenure bid.”
- a colleague describes the following:
“At one meeting I was with Amy, she was complaining to a group of us. She said she was denied tenure not because she was a lousy researcher — she’s not, quite the opposite — and not because she didn’t have good classes, she believed she did — I think some might say otherwise — but because she was accused of being arrogant, aloof and superior. And she said, ‘I am.’
- another professor, who asked that his name not be used, expressed concern about her mental health during her tenure review.
The professor said that during a meeting of the tenure-review committee, he expressed his opinion that Ms. Bishop was “crazy.” Word of what he said made it back to Ms. Bishop. In September, after her tenure denial, she filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, alleging gender discrimination. The professor’s remark was going to be used as possible evidence in that case.
It was then, the professor said, that the associate provost of the university, John Severn, came to him and asked whether he truly believed what he had said about Ms. Bishop. (Reached by phone, Mr. Severn declined to comment.) The professor was given the opportunity to back off the claim, or to say it was a flippant remark. But he didn’t. “I said she was crazy multiple times and I stand by that,” the professor said. “This woman has a pattern of erratic behavior. She did things that weren’t normal.”
No one incident stands out, the professor said, but a series of interactions caused him to think she was “out of touch with reality.” Once, he said, she “went ballistic” when a grant application being filed on her behalf was turned in late. The professor said he avoided Ms. Bishop whenever he saw her, on or off the campus. When he spotted her not long ago at a Barnes & Noble bookstore, he made sure he was out of sight until she had left the store. He even skipped a faculty retreat because he knew she would be there.
To be clear, it wasn’t as if the professor told the university that he thought Ms. Bishop was potentially violent. And, at the time, the university was narrowly focused on the legal fallout from a possible lawsuit by Ms. Bishop, he said.
[…] When the professor found out on Friday afternoon that there had been a shooting on the campus, he didn’t immediately hear exactly where it happened, who was involved, or whether the shooter was a faculty member, student, or someone from outside the university. Even so, the professor said his first thought was: “Oh my God. I bet it was Amy Bishop.”
A roundup of coverage from academia-bloggers can be found here. I must say I am rather unenthused by some of the suggestions being made, such as that “collegiality” and “personality” should be given more weight as tenure considerations. There’s a world of difference between being a “lone wolf” (as some of the world’s best scientists are) or an egomaniac, and the behavior Amy Bishop was displaying well before the shooting.
Speculating on her often-remarked on lack of eye contact, the autism/Asperger Syndrome self-help site wrongplanet.net has a thread on whether Amy Bishop may have been an “aspie”. (As anybody who’s familiar with research academia knows, it’s one of the most congenial environments for people with Asperger’s, if not the most.) One of the denizens hits the nail on the head: “From what I have read, I believe she is a narcissist. Her lack of eye contact is more like antisocial, rather than nonsocial. There is a lack of respect, rather than not understanding it.”
UPDATE 1: From Instapundit:
MORE TROUBLE FOR BILL DELAHUNT: DA Rips 1986 Bishop Report. “Three people might be alive today if Delahunt had done his job in 1986. The blood is on his hands. Instead he made a phone call and the case disappeared. Thanks to him, Amy Bishop went on to become a one-woman crime wave.”
It would be easy to dismiss the attempt to link Bishop and the Tea Party movement given the absurdity of the connection. After all, Bishop loves Obama, so how could the “anti-Obama” nature of the Tea Party movement have caused Bishop to do anything?
It’s just that these things have a way of working their way into the mainstream media, regardless of how outlandish the supposed connection.
Keep repeating Amy Bishop and Tea Party in the headlines, and it will not be long before 35% of Democrats believe there is a connection.[…]
Who was it again who invented the “big lie” technique?
UPDATE: Donald Douglas points out that the 3 dead include 2 blacks and one Indian-American, and wonders (half sarcastically) whether there may have been a racist angle. I very much doubt this (Debra Moriarity, for instance, was saved only by the magazine having run empty), but agree that this for sure would have been imputed if the killer had been anything other than a flaming left-winger.
UPDATE 2: James Taranto has a good recap in Best of the Web, and displays his usual irreverent humor in the title: “Going Postdoctoral“.
The case of Amy Bishop, the assistant professor of biology who was denied tenure at U. of Alabama, Huntsville, and opened fire on her tenure committee, killing 3 and wounding 3, just keeps getting weirder and weirder. [See here, here, and here for our earlier reporting.]
[Go to bottom of story for important update]
In March, 2002, Bishop walked into an International House of Pancakes in Peabody with her family, asked for a booster seat for one of her children, and learned the last seat had gone to another mother.
Bishop, according to a police report, strode over to the other woman, demanded the seat and launched into a profanity-laced rant.
When the woman would not give the seat up, Bishop punched her in the head, all the while yelling “I am Dr. Amy Bishop.”
Bishop received probation and prosecutors recommended that she be sent to anger management classes, though it is unclear from court documents whether a judge ever sent her there.
And Solomonia has a web-interview with the Bishop’s next-door neigtbor in Ipswich, MA:
…She was such a trouble maker. I disengaged from them early on. I literally did not have any conversation or interaction with either her or her husband (also a nutball) for over 3 years. Nothing…
…She made a big stink about the kids playing basketball in the neighborhood. On the day they first moved into the house they drove their moving truck into the basketball post that was situated between our two driveways and under the streetlight. For years all the neighborhood kids played ball there (and so did some of the Dads). When they ran the post down we thought it was just a dumb-ass accident. We soon found out that they did it on purpose.
One of the other neighbors put up a new hoop on his property and she complained about the kids. It was a protracted fight that involved multiple calls to the police. The end result was that the kids in the neighborhood couldn’t play ball after 7pm at night. She also complained about street hockey, skate boarding, tag, etc., etc… […]
What pissed me off was the loony venom and fury that accompanied her attacks. She alleged that the basketball players were smoking pot at night and causing other trouble. Totally untrue. Look at the newspaper, the Ipswich Police were in the Globe today calling her a “regular customer”. [NCT: presumably referring to this article.] She complained about everything.
She nearly got into a fistfight one night with one of the Moms who was defending her son’s right to play.
She complained so much the ice cream truck stopped driving through our street. If the kids wanted ice cream they had to go over to the next street and stop the truck.
Just this past Sunday morning as we were watching the news my son said, “Remember how she wouldn’t let us have ice cream?” He was about 8 at the time and thought that it really sucked. All the kids knew that she was the cause. […]
The day they moved out I was getting home as their moving van pulled away and went up the street. I got out of my car and a bunch of the neighbors were outside and I yelled “Ding Dong the witch is dead!” and a cheer went up all around. Soon after the new people showed up to clean the house and move some things in and the whole street celebrated with a pizza party. We welcomed the new folks with open arms. It was like the sun finally came out again.
[Minor update:] Concerning the ice cream truck, we learn here (h/t: Kathy Shaidle) that:
Bishop once stopped a local ice cream truck from coming into their neighborhood. According to WBZ-1030 radio, she said it because her own kids were lactose intolerant, and she didn’t think it was fair that her kids couldn’t have ice cream.
The much simpler expedient of buying Lactaid™ or one of its competitors didn’t occur to a biologist?!
More updates to follow here as they come in.
IMPORTANT UPDATE: this blog (via Israel forum), has a story at the Chronicle for Higher Education (academia’s main “trade newspaper”) which relates a first-person account by the unsung hero of the day, Prof. Debra Moriarity:
For almost an hour, the meeting focused on departmental business. Ms. Moriarity was looking at some papers on the table when the first shot was fired, killing the chairman of the department, Gopi K. Podila.
Ms. Moriarity looked up and saw Ms. Bishop fire the second shot. Apparently, Ms. Bishop was simply going down the line, starting with the people closest to her, killing Mr. Podila, Adriel D. Johnson Sr., and Maria Ragland Davis, all professors, and severely wounding Stephanie Monticciolo, a department administrator, and Joseph G. Leahy, a professor. All were shot in the head.
Another professor, Luis Rogelio Cruz-Vera, was shot in the chest.
After the second shot, Ms. Moriarity dove under the table. “I was thinking ‘Oh, my God, this has to stop,” she said.
Ms. Moriarity crawled beneath the rectangular table toward Ms. Bishop, who was blocking the doorway. She grabbed at Ms. Bishop’s legs and pushed at her, yelling, “I have helped you before, I can help you again!” Ms. Moriarity had in fact worked with Ms. Bishop, and they shared some similar research interests.
Ms. Bishop stepped away from her grasp. While still on the floor, Ms. Moriarity managed to crawl partially out into the hallway. Ms. Bishop, who continued shooting the entire time, then turned her attention to Ms. Moriarity, placing two hands on the gun and pointing it at her. Ms. Bishop’s expression was angry—”intense eyes, a set jaw,” Ms. Moriarity recalled.
With Ms. Moriarity looking up at her, Ms. Bishop pulled the trigger twice. The gun clicked, apparently out of bullets.
Ms. Moriarity scrambled back to the room. Meanwhile, Ms. Bishop, now barely in the hallway, appeared to be rummaging in her bag, perhaps attempting to reload. Ms. Moriarity took advantage of Ms. Bishop’s fumbling and closed the door. Others in the room then helped her push the table against the door, fearing that Ms. Bishop would continue her rampage.
Dr. Moriarity’s colleague, Joseph Ng, said her actions took a lot of guts, and saved lives. In the meantime, Amy Bishop Anderson is said to be on suicide watch, which may be routine for a week or two. Jail officials say she is interacting normally, “just like anyone else,” and a psychiatric nurse working with Bishop says she has not exhibited any suicidal tendencies.
The stories about Bishop are beginning to leak. According to an unnamed source who knows Bishop, she was an enigmatic egghead and talking to her was “like crawling to the bottom of a coal mine with the lights off. I don’t think [her husband] ever really understood her. I don’t think anybody did.”
For reasons that require no elaboration, the CHE is covering this story extensively. All five of the most popular articles are about the case (this one was the top article):
We already know (see previous roundup) that U. of Alabama “tenure denial revenge killer” Amy Bishop was a far-left extremist, obsessed with 0bama, and shot her brother to death in murky circumstances, and that the police investigation of the latter was ended following high-level intervention.
Now we learn that she harassed kids in her Ipswich, MA neighborhood; that the husband, who earlier claimed he didn’t know his wife had a gun, went to target practice with her at a shooting range; and that, while trying to escape after “accidentally” shooting her brother, she entered a Ford dealership and demanded a vehicle at gunpoint.
Here is what we do know. There was an argument only recently brought to light between Seth and his nineteen year old sister Amy that was left out of many documents in the report. Shortly after the argument, Amy fired a loaded shotgun which struck Seth at point blank range in his chest and tore the aorta of his heart, killing him.
We know that Amy then went to Dave Dinger Ford and according to Thomas Pettigrew who was working in the garage, told the Boston Herald that Bishop put a shotgun against his chest and demanded a vehicle. Pettigrew said Bishop claimed she and her husband were in a fight and he was coming after her. She was arrested in the parking lot when she exited the garage, surrounded by police with guns drawn.
She was brought to the Braintree police department where she was being booked and suddenly per direct order of Chief Polio, the booking process was ordered to stop. The Braintree Officers were inexplicably ordered to release Amy to the custody of her parents.
We know the circumstances of what happened in the kitchen show inconsistancies between Amy’s and Judith’s statements in the Massachusetts State Police REPORT
This story is getting stranger by the minute.
UPDATE: Ann Althouse has a “duh” moment: “If Amy Bishop had turned out to be right-wing or conservative [or even to watch Fox News once in a while — NCT] we’d never hear the end of it.” Love this comment:
Man in cammies with “assault rifle” goes on a rampage and the lefttards heads explode. They rage against the Second Amenment. They rage against murderous Conservatives. The want to ban guns, ban people who own guns, and ban any speech about guns. Hell, they want to ban anyone who does not agree with them.
Stereotypical frumpy looking progressive activist professor goes on a rampage and not a word about her activism, socialistic ideas, or revolutionary thought. Not a word about banning guns- except on campus. Not a word against banning progressive activists.
Bill Ayers and his wife- both professors- are forgiven their sins because they contribute to the common good. Bobby Rush and Luis Guiterrez, urban terrorists, are allowed to stay in Congress. Murderous sins forgiven. They are the heroes of the revolution. The darlings of the left.
Yeah, the left is just full of hypocrisy and full of bovine excrement.
Via the same comments section, speaking of nutjobs, Gore Vidal compares Timothy McVeigh to Paul Revere. You can’t make this stuff up.
IRA STOLL: The New York Times on the Tea Party Movement. “The whole thing is sad; that the Times seems unable to give a reasonably sympathetic hearing to Americans mad at Wall Street, Washington, Republicans and Democrats but instead travels to Idaho to interview and emphasize what it depicts as a particularly strange group of them.”
It’s as if they made Amy Bishop a representative of Obama supporters. But they’d never do that, because it wouldn’t fit the narrative would be an unfair “smear.”
UPDATE: Reader Stephen Clark writes:
Tea Partiers might rejoice in the hope that this really does reflect the view of the NY Times readership. The Times coverage of this and other political developments has merely kept its readership uninformed and unprepared. Perhaps it’s best to view the Times as providing comfort similar to that provided by the ship’s orchestra for passengers on the sinking Titanic.
But less heroically . . . .
We previously reported on a woman assistant professor named Amy Bishop at U. of Alabama, Huntsville, who was denied tenure and subsequently went into a faculty meeting and opened fire, killing 3 and wounding 3 more, of which 2 critically. Since then, some rather “interesting” details have emerged:
- The Boston Herald reports “A family source said Bishop, a mother of four children – the youngest a third-grade boy – was a far-left political extremist who was “obsessed” with President Obama to the point of being off-putting.”
This actually begs the question: did she worship him, or did she hate him for not being leftist enough?
- Instapundit pointed out earlier that her ratemyprofessors.com reviews include comments about her “socialist” views. Relevant to this shooting? Maybe not. But, as an Insty reader emailed him: “I’m guessing the ’she’s a socialist’ part won’t get talked about much in the MSM. But if she had been a conservative it’d lead every evening news cast for two months.” Not just the MSM, but blogging huskies too.
- The Chronicle of Higher Education has an interview with the husband., who claims he did not even know she owned a gun and that nothing in her behavior pointed to such an act.
- However, she apparently shot and killed her brother back in 1986. (More here and here. UPDATE: original police report here.) The shooting was ruled accidental. The DA at the time? Current lefty congressman Bill Delahunt, who appears to think Thugo Chavez isn’t all that bad. Meanwhile, Delahunt says he may not run for re-election. (UPDATE via Gateway Pundit: Bishop’s mother was apparently in politics at the time, and Delahunt was accused earlier of being soft on crime.)
- Bishop and her husband were earlier investigated as suspects in the attempted bombing of a Harvard professor. “Amy Bishop and her husband, James Anderson, were questioned after a package containing two bombs was sent to the Newton home of Dr. Paul Rosenberg, a professor and doctor at Boston’s Children’s Hospital. It was the second startling revelation in two days about the past of Bishop, who is accused of fatally shooting three colleagues and wounding three others Friday afternoon at a faculty meeting on the University of Alabama’s Huntsville, Ala. campus.” She apparently suspected the professor might be critical of her Ph.D. work.
- Insty snarkily points out that if you’re in trouble, you’d want a Delahunt in your corner. (Referring to Delahunt’s cousin, who made Excitable Andy-One-Note’s conviction for smoking pot in public “go away”.)
- Finally, at a reader’s request, here is some information about the murdered (RIP):
UPDATE 2: Wretchard on the suspect accidental death of her brother: “The Boston Globe has a link to Braintree Policy Chief Paul Frazier’s statement describing what he knew about the suspect. She had killed her brother in what was officially termed an accident, but apparently there were significant questions at the time about the resolution of the case. The relevant parts of the Chief Frazier’s statement are reproduced verbatim afther the “More”. The highlights are mine.”
“I have been in contact with the Huntsville Police Department to confirm that the suspect in their shooting had been involved in a shooting incident in Braintree 24 years ago. Their investigators will be back in touch with us within a couple of days.”
[Describing how nobody could locate the archived written report. Hmm.]
“Officer Ronald Solimini informed me that he wrote the report and said that I wouldn’t find it as it has been missing from the files for over 20 years[. He] recalled the incident as follows: He said he remembers that Ms. Bishop fired a round from a pump action shotgun into the wall of her bedroom. She had a fight with her brother and shot him, which caused his death. She fired a third round from the shotgun into the ceiling as she exited the home. She fled down the street with the shotgun in her hand. At one point she allegedly pointed the shotgun at a motor vehicle in an attempt to get the driver to stop. Officer Solimini found her behind a business on Washington Street. Officer Timothy Murphy was able to take control of the suspect at gunpoint and seized the shotgun. Ms. Bishop was subsequently handcuffed and transported to the police station under arrest.”“Officer Solimini informed me that before the booking process was completed Ms. Bishop was released from custody without being charged.”
“I (Chief Frazier) spoke with the retired Deputy Chief who was then a Lieutenant and was responsible for booking Ms. Bishop. He said he had started the process when he received a phone call he believes was from then Police Chief John Polio or possibly from a captain on Chief Polio’s behalf. He was instructed to stop the booking process. At some point Ms. Bishop was turned over to her mother and they left the building via a rear exit.”
Braintree Police Lieutenant Karen MacAleese was a high school classmate and confirmed from photographs that the suspect is the same Amy Bishop who lived in Braintree.
“I was not on duty at the time of the incident, but I recall how frustrated the members of the department were over the release of Ms. Bishop. It was a difficult time for the department as there had been three (3) shooting incidents within a short timeframe. The release of Ms. Bishop did not sit well with the police officers and I can assure you that this would not happen in this day and age.”
Amy Bishop, a Harvard University-trained neuroscientist, was taken into custody, and her husband has also been detained, the newspaper reported. Neither have been charged.
Police said three people were killed and three were wounded when the shooter opened fire about 4 p.m. during a biology faculty meeting on the third floor of the Shelby Center for Science and Technology.
University spokesman Ray Garner said Friday night the three killed were Gopi K. Podila, the chairman of the Deparment of Biological Sciences, and two other faculty members, Maria Ragland Davis and Adriel Johnson.
The three injured people are being treated at Huntsville Hospital.
A hospital spokesperson confirmed that two men and one woman had been taken there for treatment, with two of those patients in critical condition.
CBS News affiliate WHNT-TV reported the suspect had been denied tenure at the university and the victims were all faculty members.
The other day, somebody forwarded a link to the US edition of “Marie-Claire”, a veteran French women’s mag focusing on fashion, the working woman, etc. The French magazine I knew growing up was about as racy as, say, the Ladies Home Journal.
Looking at the sidebar, I was astonished to find this article by a woman named Pamela Druckerman (American, married to a Briton, living in Paris). She asked her husband what he would want for his special 40th birthday present: His answer was “a threesome” (them with another woman). She then describes in detail how she agreed on condition that she could pick the woman; how she went about selecting her; and how the encounter itself proceeded. (The description is fairly SFW and somewhat humorous: the best part was where after 40 minutes she wondered if she should check her Email.) Husband was apparently extremely pleased, but she decided once was enough. (The “other woman” was interested in a repeat performance, but appears to have been recruited on a website for enthusiasts for this sort of thing.)
My two cents worth:
- The relentless media push to “mainstream” unorthodox sexual combinations continues apace.
- I would not want to feed all straight males who’ve fantasized about being with two women. However, neither would I want to feed all the straight males who simply don’t get that some fantasies are best kept fantasies. (And I rather doubt that the idea — also relentlessly pushed by the celebri-fashion media culture — of many women having bisexual tendencies has any basis outside male fantasy.)
- I seriously wonder if, having let that “djinn” out of the bottle, they can put it back in. Intellectually philosophizing about “sharing” your partner is one thing: being able to handle it emotionally is another.
- While the French did invent the very term “ménage à trois”, it actually refers to a 3-way long-term relationship — which even less people would be able to handle emotionally.
We are clearly living in an era where “up is down and down is up”. Or perhaps cats and dogs will live together peacefully and the lion will lie down with the lamb (without replacing the lamb every day).
In any case, while at… “some other blog” (SOB) ClimateGate was declared a “nontroversy”, none other than… George Monbiot (the original “moonbat”) is calling for heads to roll.
In The Daily W*nkerThe Guardian, at that. Which is now publishing investigative pieces by Fred Pearce that actually ask tough questions about ClimateGate, and extensively refer to ClimateAudit. Have I just walked into a parallel universe?
In related news, the head of Greenpeace UK is calling for the resignation of UN climate chief Rajendra PajeroPachauri.
Meanwhile, the initial report on the investigation of Michael “hockey stick” Mann appears to be neither a whitewash nor an indictment, but rather a “greywash“.
And in other “settled science” news, British medical journal The Lancet, which for some time has not been the sharpest scalpel on the tray, has formally retracted the paper that claimed a link between vaccines and autism. (Now let’s get rid of the Israel- and USA-bashing thinly veiled as junk science, while we’re at it? One can hope.)
UPDATE: Former science advisor to the UK gov’t David King FRS first attributes ClimateGate hack to foreign intelligence agencies, then backtracks. Puh-leeze…
From a Justice Department job announcement for “up to 10 experienced attorneys for the position of Trial Attorney in the Voting Section in Washington, D.C.”:
The Civil Rights Division encourages qualified applicants with targeted disabilities to apply. Targeted disabilities are deafness, blindness, missing extremities, partial or complete paralysis, convulsive disorder, mental retardation, mental illness, severe distortion of limbs and/or spine. Applicants who meet the qualification requirements and are able to perform the essential functions of the position with or without reasonable accommodation are encouraged to identify targeted disabilities in response to the questions in the Avue application system seeking that information.
Of course, this is obviously a classic case of somebody copying and pasting boilerplate “affirmative action” copy and not bothering to proofread the end product. Still…
The Cleveland Plain Dealer reports that they have identified the woman who had identical pro-0bama missives published in over 60 newspapers all over the country — listing over 30 different residences.
“Ellie Light” is supposedly really a pediatric nurse named Barbara Brooks, aged 51. But then an element of low comedy sets in (see also Patterico, Hot Air, and Big Journalism): two different “Barbara Brooks”es come forward, and supposedly the actual letter spammer/astroturfer is the estranged husband of one of them, a Kossack (i.e., denizen of the looney-left site Daily KosKoos-Oom) named Winston Steward.
Patterico follows the Facebook and Twitter connections, and discovers (which doesn’t have to mean anything, as Patterico himself admits) that the very first Twitter friend is somebody from a Beltway PR agency that appears to be “friendly” with the 0bama administration.
My money is on some DIY “Nutroots” operation gone sour.
Robomonkey posted this bizarre ad:
As it turns out (link via comments), this was actually part of an anti-Nazi protest:
Once a year busloads of Nazis from all over Scandinavia arrive at the little town of Lund, Sweden. They come to march in honour of [Charles XII], who is buried there. Despite people[‘s] disgust and negative media coverage, the Nazi community is still growing. To annoy the Nazi marchers the town was covered with banners and posters for a fake “Nazi Gay Parade”.