January 31. 2006

Volume 45 

2. CELEBRITY Angelina Jolie Pregnant with Brad Pitt's Child
3. CELEBRITY Kate Moss and Pete Dougherty
4. CELEBRITY Paris Hilton
5. CELEBRITY Britney Spears
6. CELEBRITY American Idol - Is Fox Cross-Promoting?
7. QUASI JOURNALISM Lloyd Grove and Roger Friedman
8. QUASI JOURNALISM Victoria Newton and her pals at the Sun lie about Kylie’s medical condition
10. QUASI JOURNALISM “Blind Items”
11. BOOKS Jumping into the Frey
12. MUSIC Ron Isley Tax Evasion Verdict
13. MUSIC Sony BMG clearly doesn’t know when to shut up
14. MUSIC Album Sales – Inflation
15. MUSIC Madonna Lawsuit
16. MUSIC Wall Street gives Warner Bros Music the thumbs down
17. MUSIC Music Therapy
18. FILM The Golden Globes
19. FILM The DaVinci Crock Part 2
20. TV NBC’s “Book of Daniel”
21. TV Michael Eisner To Get A TV Show
22. RADIO Howard Stern
24. LEGAL FILE Tom Cruise sues
25. LEGAL FILE J-Lo/Marc Anthony & Kevin Costner Lap Top Theft
26. LEGAL FILE Foxy Brown Cuffed and Accused of not really being deaf
27. LEGAL FILE Judicial Misconduct: “Bad Judges”
28. LEGAL FILE Are Hate Speech Laws Democratic
29. INTERNET Wikipedia, what hath thou wrought
30. NATIONAL NEWS Civic Duty: Tracie Dean
31. NATIONAL NEWS Pentagon Analyst Larry Franklin sentenced to 12 years
32. NATIONAL NEWS The Miners: End Result of Corruption and Negligence
33. NATIONAL NEWS Spying Program
36. SOCIAL ISSUES Elton John Slams Jamaicans as “Hostile”
38. RACE RELATIONS Nazi Restorations
39. RACE RELATIONS Can’t We All Just Get Along
40. RACE RELATIONS Is One Race Better Than Another
41. RACE RELATIONS Race and Culture - Hang Ups And Stereotypes
42. CHARITY Giving to Charity
43. SPIRITUAL Divide and Conquer
44. SPIRITUAL Ingratitude
46. SPIRITUAL The Brain vs. The Soul
47. SPIRITUAL Disobedience


How many of you have managed to keep your New Years resolutions thus far? And how many of you have broken them?

And speaking of broken vows, let's move right into the next segment...

CELEBRITY Angelina Jolie Pregnant with Brad Pitt's Child

Last month I wrote about Angelina Jolie and her adoptive son (he is a beautiful boy). This month it was announced that she is pregnant with Brad Pitt’s child.

It seems like just yesterday Brad Pitt was married to Jennifer Aniston. Now he is reportedly engaged to Jolie, they are with child and he's become the adoptive father of her two adopted kids.

Wife swap? Wow, what a situation.

It's opened Aniston up to a lot of unneeded and probably unwanted publicity. I read a ridiculous headline today in a checkout line that tastelessly blared, "How Jen Plans To Crash Brad's Wedding." Yea, I believe that - not!

What's great though is she, Aniston, has been graceful, throughout.

CELEBRITY Kate Moss and Pete Dougherty

Kate Moss

When I was in England last September, so many newspapers being read by passengers on the trains had front pages with Kate Moss' face splash across them announcing a video featuring the model taking drugs. She was in a recording studio with her boyfriend at the time, musician Pete Doherty, and unbeknownst to them, they were being filmed.

It caused a big scandal, as there was this video circulating. Since then, the Met Police have been urging Moss to come in for an interview regarding the tape, as it is evidence of drug use and drug possession. It was reported she did so today.

In addition to the interview with the police, her custody rights to her daughter have been questioned in the press and she has lost millions of pounds in endorsement deals. It must be difficult for her under the circumstances, as choices she made are now affecting her in a negative way. However, she can get back on her feet.

I saw the video and in it she spoke of how strong the drugs she had taken in the past were, with one even causing her to see the Devil. It's safe to say that was a strong drug. She didn't seem mean in the video. She was just talking about her problems. You felt compassion for her, as she clearly has struggled with drugs.

As I have written on here before, I don't think most people who are addicts want to be addicts. They try drugs and end up developing an addiction.

The Cruel Cycle of Drug Use 

How drugs truly work is kind of sinister. What drugs like cocaine do is create an initial high that the user's system craves again, not realizing that the initial high will never truly be duplicated again. Then the addict starts taking more and more drugs in attempting to reach that initial high that will not be reached again. But in taking more and more drugs, some overdose. Some recover from overdoses, many don't. 

Pete Doherty Arrested for Drug Possession

Pete Doherty

"In court, district judge Stephen Dawson told Doherty: 'I'm sorry if my order will affect your fans and people who go to your concerts.'" - The Guardian

Pete Doherty was arrested for drug possession thrice in one day. In a way, the police did him a favor in arresting him and also the judge in sentencing him to two weeks. This can help him. It can be two weeks of drying out. Two weeks of sobriety and clarity. Or at worst two weeks drug free.

However, if Pete continues to associate with the same circle of friends, it is going to make it doubly hard for him to beat his addiction. Heroin is not child's play. Anyone on it must take a very serious approach if they are going to conquer it. I think he can conquer it, so can Moss.

CELEBRITY Paris Hilton

Paris Hilton running from the law...and the Colonics Center. Caffeine has been known to leave people wired!

Sidebar for site readers: Colonics is where they stick a hose in your butt and shoot caffeine in there to clean you out of all you've had to eat.

The million dollar question is, did Paris have the procedure done on her brain too, judging by the deposition excerpts posted a few paragraphs below this one.

Hilton is being sued for being a liar – twice! It seems Kaballahist Paris Hilton has a penchant for slander and libel and now it’s gotten her into legal trouble.

Zeta Graff suing Paris Hilton for defamation and libel in making up a story that she attacked her.

She is being sued by Zeta Graf for defamation of character in lying that Graf attacked her at a club over her relationship with Paris Lastis. Paris used her publicist to assist her in spreading the defamatory story via the press (isn't that how it always works). She has been formally sued for spreading "vicious lies."

"The paper reported that Graff _ who once dated Hilton's then-fiancee, Greek shipping heir Paris Latsis _ went "berserk" at the nightclub, tried to strangle Hilton and attempted to steal her diamond necklace. Graff denies the report and claims Hilton said "I'm going to destroy you" after trying to oust her from the club, according to the suit."

"Former Hilton publicist Rob Shuter said in a deposition that Hilton asked him to help plant the story and that he gave the paper comments attributed to himself, Hilton and anonymous sources that were dictated by Hilton." - Associated Press

That's bad and the "I'm going to destroy you" line is quite delusional. Really, what can Paris Hilton do. Who in their right mind would be afraid of her.

She's got some serious issues to make up a story like that. It screams insecurity and reeks of someone who thinks everyone is jealous of them...when in actuality people are not. However, clearly in Paris Hilton's mind, everyone is.

People like that always amaze me...in a bad way. They do bad things to others, then when they are called out for it, lie to themselves that everyone is just jealous of them, which is why they are in trouble for their misdeeds.

The thing is, Graf's lawyers have already gotten Hilton to admit that she made up the defamatory story. Yes, Hilton cracked that quickly under pressure. Her portions of the deposition transcript are now internet fodder and punch lines, as she said some incredibly unintelligent things:

Q: So, Ms. Hilton, can you —
Paris: I'm so hungry!

Q: Ms. Hilton please. Can you tell us your friend Terry's last name?
Paris: It's like a weird Greek name. Like Douglas.

Q: Have you seen the reports in question printed anywhere else, such as in the U.K.?
Paris: Huh-uh. There is, like, some stuff in London, though, not in the U.K. Whatever, I was in Europe all summer, so I wouldn't have seen anything in London. They only speak French in Europe, and I didn't see that stuff in London because I wasn't in America all summer.

Q: Ok ... moving on. Tell us, did you ever have a run-in with Ms. Graff at a nightclub?
Paris: Huh-uh, I just said to her... like, she is old and should stay at home with her child instead of being at nightclubs with young people. And just that — what else did I say? Just that she is not cute at all. Plus, she threatened to send Mexican people to come and beat the **** out of my boyfriend. And I'm scared of Mexicans. And Voodoo.

Other Hilton quotes:

Hilton: "I just said to her... she is old and should stay at home with her child instead of being at nightclubs with young people. And just that -- I just - what else did I say? Just that she is not cute at all."

Hilton: "He (Lastis) said that she threatened to send Mexican people to come and beat the **** out of him."

Hilton: "He said that she was going to do voodoo on me. And I kind of do believe in that stuff a little bit, so I was a little bit scared about that... "

Hilton: "I meet so many people. I don't even know some of my friends' names."

Hilton: "I would never say stalking. I'm not a dude. Like, I think a girl can only stalk a guy. She can't really stalk another girl."

Hilton: "Whatever I write in e-mail, it doesn't mean anything. It is just words I write."

There maybe an explanation for all this:

Photo of Hilton reportedly smoking marijuana

Somebody's beaming up! It's a well known fact that weed kills brain cells. Then again, one must first have brain cells, so maybe my theory about her inexplicable answers to most questions, not just in the deposition, is wrong.

In a separate lawsuit she is accused of harassing, badmouthing and threatening the life of promoter Brian Quintana in attempts to sabotage his business, when she and his friend broke up. He has requested a restraining order.

Quintana told the Associated Press, "I have received numerous calls (from Hilton) threatening my life."

That is completely out of line. Is this a common theme with people who are Kabballahist/the Kabbalah Center - harassing, defaming and threatening the lives of people. They seem to engage in this a lot, as several unrelated people have attested. 

The evidence is so bad against Hilton at this point, the only way she can win is to try to bribe the judges. Kidding.

Her publicist issued the standard statement:

"I can assure you that when all of the facts are revealed in this matter, they will show that the victim is, in fact, Paris Hilton," Hilton's spokesman said." - Associated Press

Ok, so she did it then. When I read the statement I thought, "And? Publicists always say that." This is Paris Hilton we’re talking about - goes around breaking up people’s relationships, making up stories about people, then spreading it around the industry through her little gossip network of equally vapid stars, celebrity wannabes and gossip columnists.

That's how troublesome stars work. Rather than working on whatever it is they do for a living (porn doesn't count), they spend their time stalking, being nosy in people's business and spreading gossip.

They won't go to credible papers with the lies. They go to truth challenged gossip columns under the auspices that it's gossip, so who can sue. Guess again.

Paris publicly falling over drunk - now that's class (well, no)

A poll conducted this month revealed people don't believe Paris' denials:

Did Paris defame Graff?
Yes 74%
No 26%
If you were Paris' 12th grade teacher, what grade would you give her?
F 91%
C 6%
A 2%
Total Votes: 26,546

Her above mentioned conduct may have contributed to the next news item. She was voted 2005's "Most Hated Celebrity"

Her 2006 Album

Something tells me that album is gonna harm reputations and cause trouble. From what's been written of it thus far, it sounds like a derivative mess. It's being released by Warner Bros. and considering she is disliked by entertainers for things she's done, they aren’t gonna have any pity on her when she goes on stage primping, preening and pretending to be what she thinks a singer is based on heavily imitating what’s already in the marketplace. The claws are gonna come out and it's not gonna be pretty.

While Miami producer Scott Storch, who has had several hits with other artists, is working on her album, I doubt he will be able to help Hilton because of who she is and what she deliberately does. People are not amused with her antics.

CELEBRITY Britney Spears

Boy, celebrity ain’t what it used to be. Paris Hilton…Britney Spears…need I say more. Neither are famous for talent, both famous for taking their kit off (hey, Britney Spears is just about naked in her music videos and on stage at this point).

The new breed of celebrity are like a bad earthquake that L.A. isn't ready for. Has the city ever seen anything like the current breed. Where are the Clarke Gables' and Katharine Hepburns'.

Family Values: K-Fed and Family [Pic by Todd Umbarger].

CELEBRITY American Idol - Is Fox Cross-Promoting?

Is it just me or is it every year that someone from American Idol ends up in the slammer. Which made me wonder,
with all these America's Most Wanted rejects on American Idol, is Fox cross promoting?

That was a joke. Don't take it seriously, people.

QUASI-JOURNALISM Roger Friedman & Lloyd Grove

For those of you who don’t know who I am talking, well writing about, based on that title “Roger Friedman & Lloyd Grove” – to answer your question, no, they are not the guys from Brokeback Mountain (well, at least I hope not).

I’m gonna give Friedman a break in this Column (not really). I may have written some very cutting statements about him in this Column (hard to believe, I know) last month (and the month before and the month before, but who’s counting) for defaming and libeling me in his column.

Last month I wrote about him continually being wrong about his guesses of what will be future hits and shortly after he humbled himself somewhat and admitted in his column that he doesn’t always get it right via the mea-culpa-butt-covering-in-case-he’s-wrong-again with his next guesses of future hits, “Now, look, if I'm wrong, I'll take the Sylvia Browne psychic out: I didn’t say it. I always meant the opposite, I just didn’t have time to tell you,” said Friedman.

It marked the first time Friedman actually admitted he could be wrong. You’re making progress.

This month, I am turning my attention to another gossip columnist that defamed and libeled me, Lloyd “Rainman” Grove. Yes, be afraid…be very afraid, Mr. Grove.

New York Daily News busybody/resident libeler Lloyd Grove

The un-esteemed Grove made the NY Press’ list of the “50 MOST LOATHSOME NEW YORKERS.” Nice. He came in at #20. Dude, for a gossip columnist, that’s pretty high:

#20. Lloyd Grove - Gossip Columnist HE CAME FROM the Washington Post as a sniveling insider notable for daring to report that Tim Robbins threatened him with violence for reporting a simple truth. As gossip columnist for the Daily News, Grove has been flummoxed by the city and is reduced to covering petty internet bickering long after it's old news. Check out his sterling reporting on Martha Stewart, hacking away several days after the verdict to tell us that Hillary Clinton has sympathy for a perjurer. Big scoop, Lloyd. This would usually be incompetent instead of loathsome, but the stakes were raised once you conned the Daily News into paying massive bucks for your groveling.

Lloyd “Screech” Grove has the most irritating read of a column in the world. Friedman's page you can get through without annoyance at the high levels of boredom it induces. It is the most tediously boring read on the internet. One has to pinch oneself…not to fall asleep.

Such stunning topics as who stole whose cab in New York. So what. I’d elbow a 85 year-old granny for a cab in New York (Kidding). But you get my point. With all that’s going on in the world, is that the best you can come up with for a column.

At least your fellow gossip, Roger Friedman, goes into the unknown to get his lies, oops, I mean stories, and his writing, though often inaccurate, slanted and sometimes flat out lies, flows (even if it flows into the toilet).

Friedman was recently spotted at Neverland hiding behind a giraffe trying to get the latest scoop on Michael Jackson –funny mental image worth a typing pause for a chuckle-. Ok, I'm back now.

Grove’s most delusional column was spooled into other blogs by their owners where people dissed him for his delusionalnessness (yes, that is a word - ok, no it's not) in banning Brad Pitt from his column.

Brad Pitt, banned by Lloyd Grove. What ever will Pitt do.

Because, as we all know, Brad Pitt needs the exposure from a poorly circulated column. Once the influential (I can’t even write that with a straight face) Grove bans him, what are the chances Pitt will ever be written about again?

This just in: Brad Pitt still being searched for millions of times on the internet and written about every single day since being banned by Grove.

Looks like Pitt moved on from Grove. He just meet with Kofi Annan. Who would you rather meet. Annan or Lloyd Grove. Annan or Lloyd Grove. Hmmm. Yea, that's what I thought too.

Here are a few choice reactions from the internet reading and writing public regarding Grove’s column on Pitt. Some public feedback, if you will:

1. Well when I read the article and viewed Mr Groves picture, jealousy comes to mind. He sounds like a ten year old who is jealous of his best friends toys. lola December 22, 2005 at 10:15 am

2. lol. caroline I read the entire article….and yes it does mention Jen . Many times (;
Yes, lola I thought he sounds a bit jealous too. 1Melissa December 22, 2005 at 10:42 am

3. Doubt Brad cares. jane December 22, 2005 at 11:17 am

4. and who the ***l is this Lloyd guy anyway? I think Paris Hilton is the pointless celeb that the media should just abandon. Certainly not Brad, at least he tries to make some type of difference, even if it is just to be more like his girlfriend. Anyone that tries to do positive things for people should not be bashed. This Lloyd guy needs to shut the **** up and go pick on someone useless like K_Fed or Paris or someone that truly is not worth talking about. Even people that didnt like Brad probably do not want to see his named erased from the headlines, at least it is good conversation!! mar December 22, 2005 at 12:37 pm

5. I just actually read the article, and this guy didn’t tell us anything interesting that we all have not talked about on this site. This guy sounds jealous that he did not become an overnight star by being shirtless in Thelma and Loiuse. mar December 22, 2005 at 1:02 pm

6. okay, i agree with 1Melissa- Lowdown was school boy jealousy. Since when do GOSSIP columnists bar talking about a celebrity based on narcissism and then list catty reasons as an explanation? …scribe26 December 22, 2005 at 2:46 pm

7. I’m no hardcore Brad fan but I call bu******. In what universe is Brad Pitt a more annoying and overexposed celebrity than Tom ********g Cruise? I don’t care how personally one takes his breakup and alleged new relationship, Pitt is nowhere near as deserving of a boycott as Cruise. gina_king December 22, 2005 at 3:05 pm

8. yea but everyone knows tom cruise is off his rocker no fun in that… caroline December 22, 2005 at 3:24 pm

9. yeah, I don’t really think Brad deserved this one. and I know this doesn’t really make sense, but just for kicks, I think that it should be Paris again this year - a double ban. lisalisa December 22, 2005 at 3:28 pm

10. The reason I think this Lloyd guy should shut up is because we know he will be talking about Brad in 2006! And I was talking about respect to the people that post HERE on popsugar, not Lloyd. mar December 23, 2005 at 9:38 am

11. I could give 2 ****s about Lloyd. mar December 23, 2005 at 9:40 am

Other sites responded with a similar guffaw:

12. While we agree with Lowdown editor Lloyd Grove (did we really just say that?) that Brad Pitt is a little played out these days, we can't understand why on earth he would ban the celeb from his column, as though he has something better to talk about. Plus, we are so sure that Brad is in tears over the fact that he will no longer be splattered on Grove's shady pages. We do, however, speculate that these cutting back of gorgeous male celeb coverage was tacked onto the reasons why Hudson Morgan is fleeing the column. Now, if only we could somehow get ourselves banned from ever being in column, again, we would be delighted. And maybe Hud would stay. – Jossip

13. Don’t know what this guys problem is, but according to Cinematical, NY Daily News gossip columnist Lloyd Grove is banning any future mention of Brad Pitt. – planetbradpitt

14. It's true. Lloyd Grove has banished Brad Pitt from his column-- this year's iteration of an annual cleansing ritual which began last year with Paris Hilton. Unclear if this means that Hilton is now un-banned, though I guess we'll find out pretty soon. Kind of wish he went with Judith Miller. – Fish Bowl LA

15. NY Daily News gossip columnist Lloyd Grove has put a ban on all items relating to Mr. Angelina Jolie, himself, Brad Pitt. What the **** is he thinking? He's got a host of reasons, and I'm going to tear them all apart:

"Brad's an okay actor, some of the time, and certainly a hunky movie star, most of the time - but he's no Russell Crowe...Pitt's star turns range from the bland to the ridiculous."

Um...so? First of all, Pitt admittedly doesn't have much range, but he really doesn't need it – he's just such a good star, all he has to do is show up and allow us to bask in his charisma. Mr. and Mrs. Smith is proof positive of that. And Daily Dish isn't exactly Serious Thespian Daily. When a gossip column decides it's too good to report on bad actors, there's a serious problem.

"Brad seems always to be in love ... with himself." This may or may not be accurate – I admit, I am not a serious scholar in the field of Brad Pitt interview arcana - but the quote Grove pulls to support it (blah blah blah "Jen and I did it our way" blah blah), whilst admittedly dopey, doesn't exactly make his case.

"Brad adopts the lifestyle, interests and passions of whatever woman he happens to be bedding ... much like dog owners who morph into their pets." Because Angelina Jolie has stupid-*** bleached blonde hair. Oh, wait - she doesn't?

Grove corrects himself: "With Angelina ... he's adopted her children." Uh-huh - and it's made the gossip season. - Cinematical

Nice to see your idiotic choice was so well received (not). How about you ban yourself from your column, as you keep creeping in it and you're not famous.

QUASI-JOURNALISM Victoria Newton and her pals at the Sun lie about Kylie’s medical condition

And speaking of other half-witted quasi-journalists, Victoria “Elvira” Newton and her pals at the Sun inexcusably lied in a report about Kylie Minogue was free of cancer and in the all clear. Minogue’s rep stated immediately after that the story was not true:

"Kylie Minogue's publicist has denied The Sun's reports that she's been given the all-clear from breast cancer. The paper claims doctors told Kylie last week that chemotherapy treatment has successfully destroyed all the cancerous cells in her body. But her Australian publicist has told the Sydney Morning Herald: 'There's no validity to this. It's not true.' " - Sky News

What made you do that. Have you lost your mind. You knew full well it wasn’t all clear.

My mom’s theory: after the horrible internet bashing Madonna got on several sites, read by millions of people, for willfully ripping off Kylie whilst she is fighting cancer, her defacto mouthpiece and publicly announced email pal, Newton, decided to make up the story that Kylie was free of cancer as a way of saying, see Madonna ripped off a healthy person, not a cancer patient.

Madonna must have some serious dirt on the Sun. But that’s what you get for going along with a celebrity breaking the law in two countries.


According to the NY Press, the New York Post loses between $15,000,000 to $20,000,000 million per year. Here’s another item from the NY Press list of the “50 MOST LOATHSOME NEW YORKERS.” 

"#4 Rupert & Lachlan Murdoch - Media Moguls - WHEN BRITISH TELEVISION playwright Dennis Potter learned he had terminal cancer, he named the tumor "Rupert." A bloody, distended hemorrhoid might have been more apt. The Aussie-born antichrist is alive and well, enjoying U.S. citizenship and avoiding his tax obligations, while Fox News continues to offer the world a glimpse of what American fascism would look like...

But if you're one of the millions of people who can't think of a single good reason why Rupert Murdoch shouldn't die a slow and painful death next week, here's one: Lachlan, his tattooed, 32-year-old idiot-savant heir currently serving as the publisher of the New York Post. As a newspaper reportedly losing between $15 and $20 million each year, the Post is tied with the pyramids for biggest vanity project in history—all so that Little Lachlan can have a star-spangled tabloid in New York. If there is a chunk of the WTC that hasn't yet fallen to Earth, let it crash onto father and son the next time they're dining at the Carlyle."

One would think with all the hype surrounding the Post, that it was actually making money. Go figure.


Why do certain columns love them. What happens when they get a little too to the point. Here, let me try!

Which sick, voyeuristic, celebrity pays private investigators to follow around younger entertainers and shares the reports with her equally perverse husband who is more interested in the younger subjects of the surveillance than her?

Which demented actor paid private investigators to wiretap his own ex-wife?

Which former studio executive is secretly gay, but married to an unsuspecting wife? He needs to stop what he's doing and be faithful to his wife.

Which Hollywood lawyer who loves the phrase “Shut up or we’ll shut you up,” commissioned wiretaps of legal opponents, but is lying to the grand jury?

Which cult member celebrity paid someone to break into a rival’s home and steal items?

Which female singer/so called actress wants to be cremated to hide from the public the things she’s done to her body?

Which celebrity pretends to be friends with a pregnant actress for publicity, unbeknownst to the pregnant actress who thinks she is sincere in their friendship?

Which director pretends to be gay to get more work in Hollywood when he secretly likes women?

Which Hollywood movie executive cheats on his wife in their hometown of Los Angeles and on trips to Miami? She deserves better than that.

Which aging star is jealous of her own daughter who is shaping up to be quite the hellion herself?

Which uber publicist who lied to the public about her celebrity client, is privately mad at said celebrity client because said publicist found out about the sick things the celebrity had done, which implicated said publicist in an embarrassing scandal of which said publicist said off the record about the celebrity client, “That nasty b**** knew she did this, but got everybody involved in it" to hide her misconduct.

Which TV and movie executive barked “just get me out of this” to someone regarding serious legal trouble?

Which TV and movie executive stalked a singer?

Which publicist lied to a grand jury?

Which celebrity got an STD from her promiscuous husband?

Which desperate singer/actress regularly plants items in the press that she is in contention for roles she is not even being considered for in desperate attempts to twist directors’ arms who’d rather soon not make the film at all than put her in it, because she can’t act?

Blind items are no fun. They are quite cruel actually. But it is an easy way for gossip columns to spread dirt without getting sued. But has anyone challenged that legally. Maybe one day someone will if it gets too specific. 

BOOKS Jumping into the Frey


"A Million Little Pieces" - the memoir by James Frey that has been exposed by the Smoking Gun site as a fraud.

"A Million Little Pieces"…of feces. The brown stuff has hit the fan. Houston we have a problem.

The Smoking Gun web site excruciatingly exposed James Frey's best selling memoir "A Million Little Pieces" as a million little pieces of fiction. This caused embarrassment for the Oprah Winfrey Show, as she had endorsed said book, making it a pick for her monthly book club. This endorsement caused said book to sell over 3.6 million copies.

Thus far three lawsuits have been filed against Frey and Random House due to the controversy.

As the press firestorm grew, Frey agreed to do an interview with Larry King. The interview included a call from Oprah pledging her support.

When Oprah phoned Larry King to lend her support for the embattled writer, I thought to myself, "I'd have thrown him under the bus." Not to be cruel to him, but I'd have done it in a comedic way, as supporting the book at that point would send the wrong message.

If Larry King asked: Did you know of the fabrications in James Frey's book?
My answer: James who? -sound of crickets-
Larry King: How do you feel now that it has been revealed that his memoir was chocked full of lies?
My answer: I was hoodwinked! Bamboozled! Letterman paid him to do it!
Interviewer: So you didn't know it was untruthful?
My answer: Larry, he had me telling people about his funky little book, when he knew all along that it had more lies than an indicted politician, and Larry, that's a lot of lies.

Just kidding. Then Oprah invited him back on her show to talk about the book and it was so awkward and tense because of what had transpired regarding what the Smoking Gun had revealed:

Oprah looking like she wanted to drop kick James Frey [just kidding]

Oprah and audience tore Frey into A Million Little Pieces. Her audience went Jerry Springer on the fabulist.

Seriously, there were some major fibs in the book, but at the same time, I don't want Frey to commit suicide after the press bashing he's been getting. It's been a serious press caning. I hope he will be able to recover.

I saw excerpts of Oprah questioning Frey on her show over the lies in his book and she was clearly upset and understandably so, as he put her reputation on the line.

When a book is published, an outside party such as a TV show, newspaper, magazine or web site shouldn't have to vet it for lies. I'd like to think if something says memoir, it's true.

I think it is good that Oprah has taken the stance she has now, as his conduct was starting to affect her name, evidenced by news articles and editorials.

To lend her support came across in the press as supporting a lie. Many writers questioned her original call to Larry King, but are now applauding her for speaking out against it.

Movie deal in jeopardy

Looks like one of the companies I like least on the planet, Warner Bros, just optioned a problem in buying the movie rights to Frey's book:

“The Hollywood Reporter said that a planned film of Frey's memoir could now need a rehab of its own. The controversy could keep Hollywood "A" list talent away from the project so as not to taint their careers, the paper said. Warner Bros. is developing the project with a production company owned by actor Brad Pitt and "ER" producer John Wells.” - Reuters

"The power of the overall reading experience" depended on the faith that "A Million Little Pieces" was the unvarnished truth - not just "his version of the truth" or "true to his recollections." - NY Times

Refund? What refund? said publisher Random House. Seriously, they are instructing people who wish to obtain refunds to take it back where they bought it (well, I’m paraphrasing):

“Contrary to erroneous published reports, Random House, Inc. is not offering a special refund on “A Million Little Pieces.” It has long been standard Random House Inc procedure to direct consumers who want a refund on any of the tens of thousands of books we publish back to their retail place of purchase, unless they purchased the book directly from us in which case we refund it.” - Random House

MUSIC Ron Isley Tax Evasion Verdict

The Isley Brothers - Ron Isley (right)

I was saddened to read about Ron Isley’s tax situation. He has been found guilty of tax evasion. While the Bible does say, "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's" it’s sad to see this happen to him, especially at age 64. He faces 26 years in prison.

Here’s hoping he will be able to make full financial restitution to the government and the sentencing judge will have mercy on him.

MUSIC Sony BMG Clearly Doesn’t Know When to Shut Up

"ADD STRINGER: In another memorable quote from Sir Howard’s Thursday press conference, he offered the following take on the XCP/MediaMax fiasco: "Clearly the perception out there is that we shouldn't be doing too much of that copy protection stuff." You can say that again, big guy." - Hits Daily Double

“Shouldn't be doing too much of that copy protection stuff" - no, the perception is that you should not be invading people’s privacy with an unlawful, insidious little program that was destroying $1000 computers to protect a $18 CD. That was lunacy.

If I were a judge, and I’d be a great one who acts in the best interest of justice and doesn’t take bribes, because some judges do take bribes, I would sentence every Sony BMG executive who had anything to do with the XCP trojan-malware-virus-program to one year of using a computer that was messed up by said program to solely do all their work and internet surfing.

Try getting all your work done now with the XCP program eroding the memory, speed, safety and integrity of your computers, hackers sending viruses to said computer and unlawfully going in and out of your computer whenever they feel like to steal then destroy data, read any medical records you have on your computer (doctor's appointments, prescriptions ect.), view pictures of your new born relatives that another relative emailed you to show you how adorable your new nephews are, read all your emails, commit identity theft charging up your credit cards/debit cards ect...

Side bar: is Sony BMG jinxed and it's rubbing off on its affiliates. Random House (See James Frey scandal above) is owned by Sony BMG parent company Bertelsmann AG.

In other news, it appears Sony BMG is following the entertainment industry tradition of willfully stealing copyrighted works then abusing the court system:

Jury selection is set to begin in a copyright infringement suit filed against Lil' Flip, his former label Suckafree Records, Columbia Records and Sony Music BMG. According to Granville's attorney, Scott Hemingway, Sony Music has ignored three separate court orders to turn over evidence pursuant to the case, and further alleges the companies in question of forging documents and altering financial records related to the suit. Magistrate Judge Stacy of the Southern District Court of Texas has fined Sony Music BMG and the other defendants $12,000 for violation of these orders.

"Sony is leading the charge in filing lawsuits against anyone it suspects is infringing its copyrights," said Hemingway, "but when the shoe is on the other foot, they have done everything they can to deny and delay justice for Mr. Granville."

In a separate action filed in September of 2004, NamCo America sued the same set of defendants for copyright infringement over the rapper's hit song, "Game Over." In the suit, NamCo accused Flip of using sounds from the games "Pac-Man" and "Ms. Pac-Man" on the song and it's remix. The case was eventually settled for undisclosed amount. - Baller Status web site

MUSIC Album Sales – Inflation

Sales in the music industry (and film too) have really fallen. In years past, the top five biggest sellers of 2005 would have easily approached or surpassed diamond certification in sales (10,000,000 copies sold). Inflation standards apply to calculate where this year's successes truly lay.

The New York Times stated last year's unbelievably abysmal sales, "Drop reverses the previous year's slight uptick in sales"

The Associated Press wrote, "U.S. album sales hit a nine year low in 2005." 

Hits Daily Double stated, "Music Biz Laments Worst Year Ever."

In the same article Steve Bartels, Island Records president said, "It was arguably the worst in the music business's history."

Rolling Stone labeled it, "The Worst Year Ever."

MUSIC Madonna Lawsuit

Madonna photo from Gaultier show bloggers have renamed "Nanny McPhee" [Pic courtesy of the Drudge Report]. "SADONNA - Is the Queen of Pop's quest for eternal youth taking its toll? The 47-year-old's skin was stretched across razor-sharp cheekbones and her chin was puckered as she turned up for a Gaultier fashion show. A fellow guest said: 'It was a bit of a shock to see her looking so ropey.' " - The Mirror, U.K.

As was expected and predicted by me based on the pattern of corruption I've witnessed in many entertainment industry cases (and what I have been saying since the day I filed the case back in September of 2005, as not expecting anything from the Court system based on what I have witnessed in other entertainment industry cases that reek of corruption), the case I filed was questionably closed by Judge Marcia Cooke, who ruled "pop culture icons" could not have done the "sensational accusations" leveled against them (because as you all know, celebrities never break the law. Um, see list of dozens of celebrities who have broken the law listed further in this column).

I immediately filed an appeal. This case isn't going away just like that. It's going to be a long legal ride for the Defendants, as listed below.

List of a few celebrities who have broken the law according to Crime Library:

Pee Wee Herman, Pat O’Brien, Marv Albert, Pete Rose, Mike Tyson, Mystikal, Suge Knight, Fatty Arbuckle, Eric Aude, Sandra Will Caradine, Christian Brando, Spade Cooley, Robert Durst, Steven Roye, Phil Spector, Oscar Wilde, Glen Campbell, Enrico Caruso, Robert Clary, Hogan's Hero LeBeau, Robert Downey Jr, John du Pont, Jane Fonda, Gary Glitter, Steve Howe, L. Ron Hubbard, Rick James, Don King, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Lookinland, Bess Myerson, Dana Plato, Sid Vicious and Wendy O. Williams.

United States Court of Appeals

I have filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals regarding the inappropriate closure of the case on such a shoddy legal premise that gives judges everywhere a bad name (a judge's personal opinion of celebrity, and a dubious opinion at that, is not more important than the Constitution, the law and physical evidence showing guilt).

If the appeal is not successful, I will send the case to the Supreme Court. If the case is not remedied there, then the case goes international. This is the beginning of a very long legal and social ride for the miscreant Defendants.

I also contacted a local Congressman assigned to my zip code of residence requesting to appear before Congress to testify and present a report of cases regarding widespread copyright and privacy abuses in the entertainment industry, as this whole incident and many others like it occurring in the entertainment industry on a regular basis reek of corruption.

This kind of corruption should not be tolerated in any civilized society, as it is barbaric, thievery, harassment and invasion of privacy - all crimes.

Funny enough, two days after I filed the appeal which mentioned the Belgium Court ruling against her for copyright infringement, plagiarism and willful intellectual property theft, among other things, Warner Bros also filed an appeal in Belgium. It's too late, the whole world believes she stole that man's song. It didn't help that she lied and said she'd never heard of the man, then a pic was discovered showing her and the songwriter together.

Judge Marcia Cooke's Ruling

Not only did her ruling contain legal errors, sarcasm and a deficient legal premise for what she questionably did, she only had the case for less than two days, and for reasons known to her and the Devil, quickly tossed it out. There is no way she could have possibly reviewed it and all the evidence submitted, in under two days and managed her other cases, like Jose Padilla, who a law professor wrote some not so great things about her regarding and posted it on the internet (Either way, if he is truly a terrorist, he must be brought to justice). 

Ms. Cooke has been on the bench for a year, and it shows, the newest judge in Miami, and also went to Madonna's alma mater. She owes the public more than cursory reads of serious cases with far reaching legal and social effects. Closing the case will not make it go away, only intensify it.

My dad was in disbelief and asked how she "autocratically" threw out a case with so much evidence based on her opinion that "pop culture icons" could not have broken the law, and that's what her ruling boiled down to. Not the evidence pointing to the Defendants' unquestionable guilt, which she clearly has no use for, but her opinion of "pop culture icons," which is a disgrace.

Since when is a judge's opinion of celebrities more important than the Constitution, the law and actual physical and digital evidence showing guilt.

But it is the same strain and pattern of corruption prevalent in many entertainment industry cases, especially the ones with Warner Bros as Defendants.

Sophia Stewart, who sued over the theft of her copyrighted script that was unlawfully used to make the Matrix film by Warner Bros and the Wachowski Bros (By the way "V for Vendetta" looks like it stinks), echoed similar sentiments after her case was unbelievably closed by a judge - even though it was reported the FBI found evidence that her script was present on the set of the Matrix film and used to make the film.

The FBI finds all that evidence, and for reasons known to that judge, she closed the case anyway. If FBI evidence isn't good enough, what is? What kind of vote of confidence is that in the FBI from the judicial system.

With some of these judges, Jesus himself could come down here and testify that he saw them do it, and the judge would say,  "You're just a carpenter, what do you know." That is the kind of arrogance, haughtiness and self-regard some judges are exercising today to the detriment of the judicial system and the watching world. 

After her case was inexplicably closed after all that evidence, Sophia Stewart stated, "It seems there are corrupt parties not only in Hell-y-wood, but in the judicial system."

Yes, I agree. There clearly is corruption in the judicial system, which is doing nothing for the public's confidence in said system, evidenced by postings all over the internet in articles, editorials, web blogs and message board postings.

Judges are not as regarded as they once were. Confidence in the judicial system is at an all time low. Basic searches of the internet from a variety of public sources will reveal this. There are now many web sites detailing and questioning judicial corruption, with many seeking to stop it.

That's the great thing about the internet, it can't be suppressed, You can find the truth and how others truly feel.

Judges are supposed to render decisions enforcing the Constitution and the law, not enforcing their personal opinions, personal beliefs and philosophies. The bench cannot afford such personal indulgencies at the expense of justice. That's disgraceful.

On a side note, somebody please explain to me, why is it Warner Bros keeps winning and or getting court cases against them tossed, where there are clear violations of the law that even a child can see. That alone deserves it's own investigation and hearing.

Judge Marcia Cooke did not take any of the evidence into account which indisputably showed:

1. The Defendants regular habit of visiting my web site that was being viewed by millions, as recorded by software used by thousands of webmasters all over the world - even detailing their IP addresses and server info.

2. Madonna made a sick habit of quoting items from this Column, the Diary page and my bio, word for word, in her public interviews, attributing them to herself, all after I wrote, published and copyrighted said writings on this site. According to one legal expert, "That inextricably tied her to your web site."

3. A pic of Madonna appeared in a Cafe Direct promo, of her as a black woman, but rather than it looking like Madonna as a black woman, or the Black coffee trader the blend was supposed to be of, it came out looking more like my mom in an old pic - and considering  my mom looks nothing like Madonna or the coffee trader whose image was allegedly blended with Madonna's to produce the composite - how did that happen.

4. Madonna and co. have criminally accessed my already copyrighted songs, scripts, music video treatments, photo treatments and book manuscripts, using several of them, all years after they were copyrighted by me (I used other means to secure dates of authorship as well).

5. I have experienced the same wiretapping, harassment, property break ins and stalking many in Hollywood testified happened to them at the hands of Madonna's lawyer's private investigator and the Kabbalah cult.

6. Madonna crazily began wearing unique costumes from my unreleased copyrighted works, which she had made to duplicate what was in my private copyrights that she gained criminal access to.

7. Every single song on "Confessions on a Dance Floor" contains lyrics, music and or both from songs I already copyrighted years before, some of these songs I haven't even released yet, but she criminally got her hands on copies of it and criminally used them in willful violation of domestic and international law.

8. My business computers housing my copyrighted works recorded the evidence that they were being hacked on a daily basis.

9. I was the victim of identity theft that originated with the Warner Bros owned AOL - my former internet service provider. AOL allowed a hacker illegal access to my Visa Debit card given to them to pay for my monthly internet access, and said hacker charged over $2200 to it.

Any judge that does not take the evidence into account, favoring her questionable opinion over it, should not be on the bench. A judge acting as a defacto character witness using her personal opinion of "pop culture icons" AND NOT THE EVIDENCE violates the Judicial Cannons. A judge's opinion of celebrities should never rank over physical evidence irrefutably showing someone committed crimes. That gives the appearance of corruption and gives the Court a bad name.

My question is, why don't they want this case heard. There is evidence linking several of the Defendants to willful breaches of civil and criminal U.S. and U.N. laws. If the Defendants are so innocent, what's everybody so afraid of. Innocent people don't run from the law. The bottom line is, someone doesn't want this case tried in court. The whole thing is starting to look like a grand cover-up, which does not speak well of the people involved.

Judge Marcia Cooke referred to my lawsuit as an “amusing read.” I'm glad she finds U.N. violations "amusing." My family and I have been living under U.S. and U.N. human rights violations thanks to that depraved woman and her cohorts who are hell bent on criminally using my copyrighted catalog of works with thousands of songs and dozens of scripts in it, that do not and will never belong to them, and that smug, disgraceful judge referred to it as “an amusing read.”

If she and her family had to live under the unlawful, invasive, harassing conditions my family and I have, maybe she wouldn't find it so "amusing."

What concerns me most is she also presides over criminal cases, therefore I can't help but wonder who is she letting go that is guilty and who is she putting in jail without carefully weighing the evidence. The kind of autocratic, un-Constitutional conduct I witnessed firsthand has me further questioning the integrity of the judicial system in that something like this could transpire.

She has shown that she has no respect for or use for evidence in cases and her ruling was fraught with legal errors.  

Another disturbing fact, the magistrate judge over the case since the day it was filed, William Turnoff, was formally accused by a litigant in a court document, of throwing out a South Florida case against the devilish Michael Eisner for stealing, and that it was inappropriate because he, the judge, was given valuable company shares by Eisner.

But it is the same rubbish happening in entertainment industry cases. I wrote of the 100 cases I reviewed that bore that same pattern. Cases amazingly get tossed out of court or bear strange verdicts when Warner Bros and or Disney are the Defendants.

"Warner Bros is a big company with connections"

About a year ago, a lawyer from a well known Miami law firm said to me regarding this case, “Don’t be so cocky you’ll win in Court. Warner Bros is a big company with connections.” Apparently…

Pardon me for thinking if you are severely wronged and have proof of misconduct being committed against you, you are supposed to win in court. 

While the Constitution guarantees you certain rights, apparently a Federal judge who swore before God to uphold the Constitution and the law can un-Constitutionally strip you of those Constitutional rights based on said judge's opinion, personal beliefs and philosophies - and not the Constitution or the law.

The Constitution is a great document to base any civil society upon - but it only works when people actually follow it.

Regarding the lawsuit, no one is undefeatable. Media giants have their David’s too. The God I believe in never lost a fight…and He’s not about to start now.

The good news - the boycott is working. Rolling Stone called last year in music "the worst year ever" and sales analysts are now saying this year looks like it will be worse, after the "up tuck" in 2004. 

Excerpts of the appeal I filed:



1. Notice is hereby given that AISHA GOODISON in the above named case hereby appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit of THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA from the FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND DISMISSAL OF ALL PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT entered in this action on December 21, 2005.

2. The Plaintiff is the exclusive owner of numerous Copyrights that were granted by the Library of Congress, years before the Defendants’ willful and criminal infringement thereof. Exercising her Constitutional rights, the Plaintiff filed suit in Federal Court, pro se, to stop the willful infringements of her Copyrighted works by the Defendants, who have a long, sordid history of the very same misconduct the Plaintiff has sued them for.

3. However, Judge Marcia Cooke single-handedly, autocratically, summarily and unconstitutionally tossed her lawsuit out of Court, based on her opinion of the probability and likelihood that famous “pop culture icons” and “the companies who bring their entertainment to the masses” Defendants could commit the “sensational accusations” leveled against them in said Complaint, making no reference to the irrefutable digital and physical evidence the Court was presented with of the Defendants’ willful misconduct. This was a miscarriage of justice with the Judge acting for the “pop culture icons” and “the companies who bring their entertainment to the masses” as a defacto character witness and defender.

4. Judge Marcia Cooke made several claims and allegations against the Plaintiff in her hasty ruling in a case she had for two days before tossing it out and failing to cite examples of said claims and allegations against the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff “Failed To Present A Case For Relief”

5. The Plaintiff did not fail to present a claim for relief when she cited “Copyright Infringement” as the main basis for her case. Copyright Infringement is a violation of Federal Law. The Plaintiff filed suit in a Federal Court with the proper subject matter jurisdiction and venue. The Defendants are constantly sued around the world for copyright infringement and have been pronounced guilty by other Judges. There is a long list of misconduct in the same vein by the Defendants in similar cases, where they have been found guilty and liable.

6. Judge Cooke has not cited one law or case that states the Plaintiff; the owner of many U.S. Federally assigned copyrights, is not entitled to relief in Federal Court, which has undeniable jurisdiction over this case, that is for Federal Copyright Infringement


8. The Copyright Office has accepted Copyright fees from the Plaintiff over the last 15 years and granted her Copyrights and the exclusive rights that accompany them i.e. Copyright protection of her works and the ability to bring suit in Federal Court in the event said Copyrights are infringed.

9. Sadly, her Copyrights have been infringed, yet she is being denied her Federal and Constitutional right to file suit to stop the willful infringements and recoup the money lost due to the Defendants willful, criminal misconduct, based on the Judge’s opinion of the likelihood famous, influential Defendants committed the malfeasance they are accused of and not based on the Constitution, the Law or the physical and digital evidence submitted to the Court.

10. This is unconstitutional and an act of treason against the U.S. Constitution and Federal law. No citizen is above and or greater than the Constitution of the United States.

11. Judge Marcia Cooke via her ruling has unconstitutionally stripped the Plaintiff of her Constitutional rights. One cannot summarily tear up the Constitution in favor of one’s personal opinion that “pop culture icons” and “the companies who bring their entertainment to the masses” absolutely, positively could not have committed the crimes an unknown immigrant U.S. citizen writer/singer is formally accusing them of – especially when they have been found guilty of this very same misconduct by other judges.

“50 Plus Page Morass Of A Complaint”

12. The Plaintiff was instructed by Judge Marcia Cooke’s colleague, Judge Cecilia Altonaga, the first presiding Judge in this case that was recused for a gross conflict of interest that was not disclosed to the Plaintiff, who had to find out about said conflict of interest on the internet, that she was to submit an amended Complaint of 60 double spaced pages, which she compiled with two business days later.

13. However, Judge Marcia Cooke stated in her FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL that the Plaintiff was instructed to submit a 50 page double spaced amended Complaint and instead, in her estimation, turned in a “50 Plus Page Morass Of A Complaint.”

14. REQUEST: For Court record, the Plaintiff demands an explanation of how these two conflicting requests can be achieved in a double spaced “50” or “60” page Complaint against a main Defendant, Madonna, who unlawfully engaged roughly 100 people in assisting her in knowingly and willfully breaking Federal and international law at the Plaintiff’s expense, as she has been sued for doing to others on almost a yearly basis for the last several years.

15. The average Madonna CD will take 70 or more people to produce and market. The Plaintiff naming 100 Defendants who knowingly participated in civil and criminal violations of Federal and international law, is not a frivolous nor is it far fetched that that many people broke the law in knowingly assisting Madonna in misconduct. She has been sued for and or publicly accused of this very misconduct numerous times before for EVERY SINGLE ALBUM OF HER CAREEER.

16. Her credibility is gone, with the public and critics now publicly turning against her in droves for her many notable thefts of other artists Copyrighted works. She has become synonymous with this misconduct, which is easily verified. She is regularly publicly referred to as a fraud and a hack for this misconduct she has willfully utilized against numerous members of the entertainment community, further embarrassing herself in creating publicly written about, international incidents where she has willfully stolen from foreign artists and been caught red-handed.

Judge’s Assertions Made Without Citation of Alleged Deficiencies

17. Judge Marcia Cooke referred to the Plaintiff’s Complaint as a “Supermarket tabloid recounting” and “sensational allegations” against “pop culture icons” and “the companies who bring their entertainment to the masses” but did not cite examples of her, Judge Cooke’s, allegations found in the Plaintiff’s complaint. The law does not afford anyone, not even a Federal Judge, the luxury of making an allegation without citing proof of said accusation. That stretches the limits of judicial immunity and is as harmful to the service of justice as one who is careless with a sword.

18. The Plaintiff’s allegations are factual with credible evidence and Court submitted exhibits to back them up. None of it is slanderous, libelous or “tabloid” in nature. Judge Cooke made this broad allegation and did not cite one example thereof in the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

19. The Plaintiff has not asked the Court to take her word for it. She has presented credible, irrefutable evidence that is not being addressed. How can such a mountain of credible digital and physical evidence, coupled with the Defendants long history of this very misconduct cited in numerous other cases, be ignored.

Copyright Infringement

20. The Court has not addressed the very serious issue of copyright infringement in this case.
1. The Plaintiff submitted a fact-based case with technological and physical evidence to support her claim of Copyright infringement, among other counts.

2. The Plaintiff submitted side-by-side digital analytical evidence to show that the Defendants listed in the case have visited her web site that they willfully stole from, on many occasions, as evidenced by the web site statistics program used by thousands of webmasters around the world. The Plaintiff also sufficiently established access through other means.

3. The Defendants further violated her copyrights “Right of Attribution” on many occasions in repeating publicly, verbatim, copyrighted items from her web site – all after she copyrighted them. They are inextricably linked to her publicly viewed web site and that fact can never be erased, as records of it have been indelibly saved to discs.

4. These are not mere allegations subject to one’s interpretation thereof based on prejudices, star struck views on “pop culture icons,” “the companies who bring their entertainment to the masses” or preconceived notions. The law and justice do not afford such luxuries.

5. The “pop culture icons” in question have a very sordid history of breaking civil and criminal law and have been guilty for these misdeeds in other cases.

6. The Defendant Madonna has shown a great propensity for this type of misconduct, yet it is not being taken into account. The “pop culture icon” was:

7. Sued over 10 times for copyright infringement, in the latest case having been found “guilty” of copyright infringement and plagiarism.

8. Sued 3 times for invasion of privacy and civil rights violations by unrelated people via unrelated incidences.

9. Has displayed a willful, publicly viewed propensity for being cruel to children.

10. Has displayed willful propensity for choking innocent citizens, among them a child whose family sued.

Case Dismissed On Judge’s Prejudicial Opinion Of “Pop Culture Icons” and Not The Evidence

21. Many “pop culture icons” have been accused of and been found guilty of crimes that willfully broke the law.

22. The Judge may not want to believe that famous people she fawningly referred to as “pop culture icons” and “the companies who bring their entertainment to the masses” could commit the malfeasance listed in the pages of the Complaint, but the fact of the matter is they have and numerous credible people witnessed it. People who are ready and willing to testify in Court under oath. The Court was also presented with concrete evidence of civil and criminal misconduct and Judge Cooke refuses to make reference to that.

23. These companies that “bring entertainment to the masses” have been found guilty of Copyright Infringement and other crimes against the US Constitution, Federal Law, US citizens and international citizens in other cases (USA v. Warner Bros, Acquaviva v. Madonna).

24. Being a “company that brings their entertainment to the masses” should not exempt one from the legal consequences that come from willfully breaking the law.

25. This would trample on the U.S. Constitution, Federal Law, Civil Rights Laws and equality in placing favor on a “company that brings their entertainment to the masses” as opposed to the hard working immigrant US citizen whose rights were horribly violated in a manner which the U.S. Constitution, U.S. Federal Law and the United Nations condemns.

26. The U.S. Constitution deems all equal with the right to fair, impartial, unprejudiced access to the Court system, therefore utilizing such a basis to throw out a valid Copyright infringement case is unconstitutional.

27. Judge Marcia Cooke stated in her Ruling, “These allegations are nothing more than sensational accusations that bear no relationship to each other or the parties accused.”

28. However, the Judge has made no reference to the digital and physical evidence she has been presented with that ties all the Defendants to each other.

29. The Judge has made no reference to the fact that the alleged “sensational accusations that bear no relationship to each other or the parties accused,” were committed by “pop culture icon” Madonna and her publicly established music industry partners and business affiliates, who do bear “relationship to each other” and “the parties accused.”

30. The Court was presented with exhibits to support this, that showed the clear, irrefutable business ties among the Defendants, yet Judge Cooke made this statement that contradicts public, Defendant announced press releases, IRS, Division of Corporations and S.E.C. records attesting to the Defendants irrefutable business ties.

Case Dismissed On Judge’s Opinion of the “pop culture icon” Defendants and Not Experts in each field

31. Judge Marcia Cooke via her Ruling autocratically became, Judge, Jury, Musicologist, expert music transcriber and analyst, expert music witness, expert computer scientist, expert computer security technician and expert surveillance security technician in briefly analyzing and summarily tossing out a case in two days that requires testimony of a musicologist, expert music transcriber and analyst, expert music witness, expert computer scientist, expert computer security technician and expert surveillance security technicians.

32. The Plaintiff was under the impression that the purpose of a Complaint was to list the wrongs committed that violate U.S. Law and it was up to a Jury to decide the truth not a star struck judge referring to “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses.”

33. A case is not supposed to be subject to a judge’s personal belief of guilt or innocence based on “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” or the judge’s opinionized probability of a Complaint being true or not.

34. That is commonly known as prejudice – something a judge should never be. A case is supposed to be based on the facts, evidence and testimony. Not a judge’s prejudiced opinion of the likelihood famous people broke the law. The law was never based on such stargazing reasoning. History has shown many famous people have broken the law. Therefore, how can one equate fame with innocence, when so many celebrities have been arrested, tried and jailed for numerous crimes against innocent members of the public whose constitutional rights were violated by said celebrities?

35. The Plaintiff demanded a jury trial for the case to be tried by a Jury not a Judge fawning over “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses,” one of whom, Madonna, choked a child, 10 year old Keith Sorrentino of Long Island, and additionally choked the son of “pop culture icon” Dick Clark.

36. Judge Marcia Cooke has tossed out a Federal Copyright Infringement case based on her opinion of “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” when the Court system reflects said “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” have been found guilty in other cases of the same allegations the Plaintiff has made against them.

Unpassed Laws?

37. “To provide the Court with some legal bases for their claims, the Plaintiffs also refer to a series of statutes that have allegedly been violated. Some of these statutes are known to the Court and others remain to be conceived of, passed by the legislative branch of government, and sign into law by the President of the United States.” – Marcia Cooke stated regarding Aisha v. Madonna.

38. The Plaintiff is unsure of whether or not the Judge was being sarcastic in her ruling, as each of the Complaint’s cited “Laws Violated In Which The Plaintiffs Are Entitled To Relief” are established laws that other American Citizens have filed suit under as their basis for relief.

39. Once again, Judge Cooke failed to cite which of the laws the Plaintiff made reference to, “remain to be conceived of, passed by the legislative branch of government, and sign into law by the President of the United States.”

40. The Plaintiff sued under established U.S. laws and U.N. laws the United States is sworn to uphold as a member of the United Nations. Other litigants have sued citing these laws, therefore why is the Plaintiff openly being discriminated against in being told she is not entitled to relief for the Defendants’ violation of the following laws:

1. Copyright Act 17 U.S.C. 101
2. The Lanham Act 15 U.S.C. 1051
3. The Business and Professions Code of Sections 17500 to 17535
4. Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act
5. Title 18 section 1341 of the U.S. Code (Mail Fraud)
6. The Securities Exchange Act of 1934
7. Violations of The U.S. Constitution: The Fourth Amendment
8. Multiple willful violations of RICO statues
9. The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986
10. Title 18 U.S.C. Sec.1001
11. Title 18 U.S.C. Sec.1030.
12. Title 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2510
13. The No Electronic Theft Act (NET)
14. 17 U.S.C. _ 506 (a)(2) and 18 U.S.C. _2319(c)(3)
15. Multiple violations of The Universal Copyright Act of 1952
16. Multiple violations of The Digital Millennium Copyright Act
17. Multiple violations of The Berne Treaties of 1967, which the U.S. joined in 1989 and swore to uphold.
18. The Universal Declaration Of Human Rights (UDHR 1948), which the U.S. joined and swore to uphold.
19. The United Nations Guidelines/Computerized Personal Data Files, which the U.S. joined and swore to uphold.
20. The European Convention on Human Rights
21. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union
22. The inter-American declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (Art V), which the U.S. joined and swore to uphold.
23. The Inter-American Convention on Human Rights (Art 11), which the U.S. joined and swore to uphold.
24. The United Nations Convention on the rights of the Child, which the U.S. joined and swore to uphold.

41. It was the Plaintiff’s understanding that as a U.S. citizen it is her right to have her case heard, not a privilege based on the determination of a star struck judge. Why is the Plaintiff being deprived of her Constitutional rights.

42. “Not one sentence contained therein demonstrates that the Plaintiffs have been injured and are entitled to some relief.” – Marcia Cooke stated regarding Aisha v. Madonna.

43. The Plaintiff alleged the Defendants willfully infringed millions of dollars of copyrighted works belonging to the Plaintiff, who copyrighted these works years before the Defendants infringed them. The Plaintiff additionally listed the items infringed and their corresponding Copyright registration numbers, as has been done in other accepted Federal Copyright infringement cases. How is that, “Not one sentence contained therein demonstrates that the Plaintiffs have been injured and are entitled to some relief.”

44. This is a Federal court. How is stating a claim for Copyright infringement, a willful violation of Federal law, in a Federal court, not grounds for relief.

The Plaintiff’s Companies Are Not Corporations

45. “It is a well settled principle of law that a corporation cannot appear pro se and must be represented by counsel.” – Marcia Cooke stated regarding Aisha v. Madonna.

46. The Plaintiff’s businesses Judge Marcia Cooke referred to are not “corporations.” “Sonustar” is a sole proprietorship and “Aisha Kamilah Music (ASCAP)” is solely an ASCAP name title granted for the Plaintiff’s music publishing rights, as they collect royalties for it on a sole proprietorship type basis with all taxes to be paid through the Plaintiff’s designated social security number. There are no corporate or corporation styled attachment entities.

47.The Plaintiff understood the word “corporation” to mean a business incorporated bearing the “inc” or “incorporated” title signifiers. Aisha Kamilah Music (ASCAP) and Sonustar are not “corporations.” Sonustar is a “sole proprietorship” which the State of Florida does not recognize as a “Corporation.”

48. Judge Altonaga’s first admonishment stated “corporations” needed to be represented by licensed legal counsel. It did not state sole proprietorships.

49. The Plaintiff was not being disobedient, but following Florida Law and the Descriptions assigned by the State governing local businesses.

50. The IRS also defines a sole proprietorship as, “An unincorporated business that is owned by one individual. It is the simplest form of business organization to start and maintain. The business has no existence apart from you, the owner. Its liabilities are your personal liabilities. You undertake the risks of the business for all assets owned, whether used in the business or personally owned”


51. The Plaintiff was sent a copy of the ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TIME EXTENSION IN SERVING DEFENDANTS one page short. Page 1 states “Page 1 of 2” but no page 2 was included in the mailing sent to the Plaintiff.

Case Entered Into Court System Incorrectly

52. It has come to the Plaintiff’s attention that there is an error in how the lawsuit Aisha vs. Madonna has been entered into the Court’s computers. It is listed under “Madoona” with two o’s instead of “Madonna” with one “o.”

53. The Plaintiff did not file the case with the spelling error of “Madoona” with two o’s instead of “Madonna” with one “o” - see exhibit A.

54. People searching for the case by the name “Madonna” will not be able to find it. Though the lawsuit is on the internet on the Plaintiff’s web site and republished and linked on numerous other international web sites, for search purposes, public record, court reference and archiving, this error should be corrected.


United Nations Treaties

58. The Court is sworn to uphold and enforce the law. To do anything less is treason to the Citizens of the United States and the Constitution.

59. The Plaintiff brought a valid Federal Copyright infringement case that should not be subject to anyone’s prejudices, opinions or preconceived notions. It is subject to the Law and the Constitution.

60. To dismiss the Plaintiff’s case that has willful violations of numerous U.S. Federal laws and U.N. treaties will place the Court in willful violation of the U.S. Constitution and U.N. Treaties and the United States in willful violation of U.N. treaties.

61. The Plaintiff is entitled to have her valid case heard, as she has met the criteria for having her case heard. To deprive her of this right is a willful violation of the U.S. Constitution and U.N. laws.

62. The law is the law. It is not subject, captive or servant to anyone’s prejudices, view on celebrities, “pop culture icons” or any other personal interpretations thereof. The Defendants have willfully violated several Federal laws and it is the Court’s duty to hear the case.

Justice Is Blind


64. If one were to use such a basis and premise for deciding a legal case as was done here, should that not swing the odds in the other direction in that there is a long, established case history of this misconduct by the Defendants.

65. The Plaintiff has loved this country since she was a child. She has defended it to verbal enemies and sought to make it better. The Plaintiff understands that the Judge may feel prejudice against her for requesting the recusal of her colleague, Cecilia Altonaga, but to commit treason against the United States Constitution, U.S. law and U.S. citizens in throwing out a valid Copyright Infringement case with irrefutable digital evidence is unconstitutional and un-American.

Eyes Of The World Are Watching This Case

66. The eyes of the world are on this case. It is being referenced worldwide. What will it say of the U.S. Judicial System to the watching world that a Copyright Infringement and Invasion of Privacy case with so much credible, digital, irrefutable evidence that scores of people watched unfold via the internet right before their very eyes was willfully tossed out of court by a U.S. Federal Judge whose ruling contained sarcasm, legal errors, clear favoritism to the Defendants who she fawningly referred to as “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring entertainment to the masses.” It will reinforce every negative world media stereotype of America.

67. And what message does that send to the American public who are also watching this case – many of whom have had their Copyrights willfully violated by these very same Defendants in their quest for ill-gotten wealth and have made reference to the case Aisha v. Madonna in citing problems they themselves are experiencing.

68. The message it will send is if your rights are violated by “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” you have no Constitutional rights and your case will summarily be tossed out of court by a Judge, within a couple days of receiving it (Assigned the case on the 16th of December, delivered to said judge on the 19th of December and dismissed by the 21st of December, just in time for Christmas), as the “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” could not have possibly done what they have been accused of by a nobody. And “Pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” desire to criminally gain ill gotten revenue in violation of SEC laws trumps your Constitutional right as a U.S. citizen and member of the human race, assigned rights by the United Nations.

69. That is not the America the Plaintiff knows. In the America the Plaintiff knows, people have rights. The Constitution and U.S. Federal Law are enforced. People are not arbitrarily deprived of their Constitutional right to have their cases heard by a jury of their peers. People are patriotic and kind. The government is impartial in its pursuit of justice. The famous and the unknown are treated with equality, dignity and respect in Court. People are not verbally abused by a Judge presiding over a case the law forbids them to preside over based on a gross conflict of interest that violates the Federal “Judge’s Cannon of Ethics.” People do not have their credible cases summarily tossed out by a Judge prejudicially influenced by the “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” Defendants, evidenced by her written statements – who ironically have been found guilty in other cases of the very crimes the Plaintiff has formally accused them of - not just nationally, but internationally. That is not the America the Plaintiff knows. That is a judicial autocracy, which the Constitution forbids and condemns, as America is a democracy, not a Judge autocracized dictatorship.

Unconstitutionality of Judge Cooke’s Decision

70. Judge Cooke failed to show the Constitutionality of her ruling in summarily dismissing a jury trial demanded Federal Copyright Infringement case, very similar in layout, style and format to other Copyright Infringement cases accepted by other Federal Courts around the country, that also contains digital and physical evidence to support said Complaint. Why is it other Plaintiffs have submitted similar cases with similar charges to other Federal Courts and they weren’t dismissed; yet the Plaintiff’s case has been dismissed?

71. The plaintiff stated her claim in numbered paragraphs. The Plaintiff stated the US laws violated. The Plaintiff stated subject matter and personal jurisdiction. The Plaintiff stated which laws the defendants have broken. The Plaintiff stated her prayer for relief

72. In essence, the Judge’s ruling is saying based on her opinion and not the Law, the Plaintiff is not entitled to relief in Federal court, for the Defendants willfully violating her Federally assigned Copyrights.


74. Why have the Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights been torn up and tossed away by Judge Cooke in a ruling containing legal errors and unsubstantiated allegations against the Plaintiff that the Judge refused to cite examples of that are allegedly contained in the Plaintiff’s Complaint.

75. The entire ruling is Judge Cooke’s opinion and view of “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” and not based in the Constitution or Federal Law.

76. No where in the Constitution or in Federal Law does it grant a judge the right to summarily toss out a case with Federal Copyright Infringement violations based on her clearly prejudicial opinion against a nobody Plaintiff in favor of “pop culture icons” and “companies that bring their entertainment to the masses” who have been found guilty in other cases of the very things the Plaintiff has formally accused them of.

77. Judge Marcia Cooke committed substantial errors and her orders must be reversed, as it violated the Plaintiff’s Constitutional rights and is dishonoring the Plaintiff’s Federally assigned copyrights and U.N. assigned rights.

Dated: January 4, 2006

Judge Cecilia Altonaga

Judge Cecilia Altonaga was the first judge who was assigned my lawsuit. After the first hearing with her presiding, I lost all confidence in the judicial system, due to unprovoked verbal abuse, slander, her interrogating me like I was the accused, her trying to send a Copyright case to State court, when it is an establish principle that the Court she works for, has undeniable Federal jurisdiction over Copyright cases, and her presiding over a case, my case, the Judicial Cannons forbade her to (and it is my belief that she knew of the conflict of interest. In this case, if I knew, she should have).

Apparently I am not the only one questioning her poor judgment and inability to discern the truth. Days later an article appeared in the New York Sun on December 23, 2005, where attorneys and a New York Law Professor questioned her decisions in another case that tossed out the rights of many litigants.

Judge Cecilia Altonaga granted the approval despite objections from several law firms and a prominent New York law professor, all of whom argued that the deal was unfair and may have been the product of collusion between the company and plaintiffs' attorneys.

The deal would end at least 10 class action lawsuits American Express was facing over its handling of foreign currency transactions.

The move to settle all the claims before Judge Altonaga drew the ire of attorneys involved in some of the suits. The objecting lawyers said the New York firm that cut the deal with American Express, Garwin, Bronzaft, Gerstein & Fisher, was focused on the 1% to 2% service fee to cardholders - or "members," as American Express calls them - and knew little about the other allegations.

The lawyers attacking the deal, who also have a financial interest in keeping their own cases alive, hired a law professor, Samuel Isaacharoff, to weigh in against the settlement. Mr. Isaacharoff, who recently decamped to New York University from Columbia, called the negotiations that led to the deal "whipsawed."

"The most striking and disturbing feature of the present proposed settlement is that the release reaches claims that were never pleaded in the underlying action and were negotiated away without any effort to assess their value," the professor wrote in a declaration filed with the court. He expressed concern that the company might be seeking "to buy peace by cutting a deal with the weakest potential class counsel, there by offering a windfall to lawyers who had no leverage in the case, other than the willingness to settle cheap."

Judge Altonaga, who was appointed to the bench by President Bush in 2003, said one factor in her decision to accept the settlement was that the claims asserted in all the lawsuits were "weak" and that the company's defenses "present a significant hurdle to any potential recovery."

One of the attorneys who asked Judge Altonaga to reject the deal, David Stellings, said he plans to file an appeal. That is likely to delay any distribution of the settlement fund for a year or more.

In an interview yesterday, Mr. Isaacharoff said he disagreed with Judge Altonaga's decision. He said he continues to believe the entire array of foreign-transaction cases against American Express may have been worth a lot more than $75 million, a figure he described as the product of "a gestalt assessment."

A law professor said that. There was an article I read and cited in my motion to recuse her as the original judge over my case. The last lines had to do with her possibly becoming a Supreme Court justice one day.

It is my literal prayer to God above that she never becomes a Supreme Court Justice as she is now, after what I witnessed from her firsthand in the court room i.e., unprovoked verbal abuse, arrogance, clear favoritism, glaring and slander. No court room in the world can withstand such conduct and accommodate justice at the same time.

Copyright Infringer/Plagiarist Katherine Fugate A/K/A, K-Fug

“Valentine’s Day” – a planned Warner Bros film criminally ripped off by a Defendant in my lawsuit, Katherine Fugate, another Madonna and Warner Bros affiliate, in which she is illegally and willfully using a Valentine’s Day film I wrote and copyrighted years before, even with the word “Valentine’s Day” in the title.

She only dropped the last 3 words off the title of my film and is criminally using the same plot, characters and items listed in my already copyrighted script that she gained criminal access to. She is already a Defendant in the case with clear ties to Madonna and Warner Bros and continues to criminally use more of my already copyrighted work without permission.

Your parents must be so proud that they bore a thieving, fraud like you that criminally rips off an indie writer and pathetically takes credit publicly for something she didn’t write. Your family must be so proud.


What I found amazing at the court hearing two months ago is that Madonna has insurance for lawsuits. She should have been rendered uninsurable long ago, as she willfully and continually steals copyrighted works deliberately. There have been so many cases against her for this, and triple the number of public allegations of theft as well.

She deliberately steals music, film and photo items from foreign artists and brings them back to America thinking none will be the wiser. Ever heard of the internet. All the news people try to hide gets distilled onto it for millions, sometimes billions to read.

Jerry Bruckheimer

Jerry Bruckheimer

Jerry Bruckheimer, another Defendant in the case, works infringe copyrights, not just mine, and he's been sued for it already with "Pirates of the Caribbean." His works are highly derivative knock offs of existing copyrighted works. CSI:Miami is the new Miami Vice. He is working on a legal drama that sounds like a knock off of  L.A. Law.

His next movie project, the Prince of Persia, is a rip off of "The Mummy"

"Set in 9th century medieval Persia, about a young adventurous prince who uncovers a dangerous artifact in a remote mountain kingdom and with the help of an enemy princess, must stop a despot from unleashing a sandstorm that could destroy all mankind."

If you've seen "The Mummy" or its sequel, you'll recognize that as the plot.

Bruckheimer tries so hard to be hip that it unintentionally becomes funny. His published alleged iPod list reveals this.

Yes, Jerry, we know....you're hip, you're with it, you're cool, you're down...you're 60 years old and becoming a cliché of the aging Hollywood producer trying his best to be down with kids he clearly isn't in touch with, with a side order of the song "Pretty fly for a white guy." It's almost as bad as your partner Madonna dressing like a 21 year old and trying so hard to be hip. It is very undignified. People should age gracefully and with dignity.


It's because of such conduct, coupled with thieving that fans of the band Goldfrapp have renamed the thieving Madonna "Oldfrapp" for ripping off the band, whose lead singer is much younger than she.

Pellicano Wiretap Case

Anthony Pellicano and Bert Fields -

Some people think something is bugging Madonna's lawyer, Bert Fields (get it, bugging - wiretap case). Field's has also represented Bruckheimer's company/his partner. Many believe a blind item in the New York Post which stated, "Which hard-nosed power lawyer is quaking in his hand-stitched loafers about a looming indictment that could land him behind bars for years" refers to him.

- Aisha having a thinking moment - "hand-stitched loafers?" - you think he got them at Payless?


Fields is in his 70's and at his age he doesn't want to star in Brokeback Prison.

Bert Fields - employed Anthony Pellicano many times

Fields is once again mentioned in the Anthony Pellicano wiretap case that produced two arrests this month. Actress Sandra Carradine, actor Keith Carradine's ex-wife, admitted she paid Pellicano to tap her ex-husband's phone during litigation. Officer Craig Stevens, of the Beverly Hills Police, admitted he gave Pellicano unlawful access to "law enforcement databases" i.e. people's private records. They both face several years in prison. Additionally, experts have said expect more indictments shortly, the movie theatre analogy was quite funny:

"It's like a rollout in the movie business," said former Pellicano defense lawyer Victor Sherman, comparing the Carradine and Stevens charges to the way some movies are premiered. "You know, they start small in 10 theaters, then later they'll go wide in 1,000."

Said lawyer Peter Knecht, who represents Sandra Carradine: "It's going to hit the fan soon."

Prominent entertainment lawyer Bert Fields is one of the names that has been linked to the investigation. Actor Garry Shandling acknowledged to The New York Times in 2003 that FBI agents informed him some of his telephone conversations had been recorded. In the late 1990s, Shandling was in a court battle with his former manager, Brad Grey, who is now president of Paramount Motion Pictures Group. Fields was Grey's lawyer.

He said Pellicano taped the telephone conversation that ultimately implicated Carradine. "He was like Richard Nixon; he forgot he was taping himself, too," Knecht said. - Sign On San Diego

Confessions Flopped

According to Reuters, "Music biz blues: hot new releases burn out, Tue Jan 3, 2006 2:33 AM ET "Confessions on a Dance Floor," Madonna's much-trumpeted return to dance music, hit No. 1 in November behind a 350,000-unit debut stanza. But immediate freefall ensued: The album fell 39% in its second week and 49% in its third. "

Funny Article

A funny article I saw in the Miami Times the other day made me laugh. The title that provoked the laughter was, "This used to be Madonna's playground, but it's time for her to get off the swing." It was written by Jean Carey and chronicled Madonna's desperate, derivative attempts at trying to stay relevant, ripping off younger stars and urging her to retire.

Madonna Copying "Pimp My Ride"

"MADONNA is such a fan of the popular MTV series Pimp My Ride that she plans to copy the car makeover concept for her new music video. - Electric New Paper, Singapore"

There's that word copy again. That's all she seems to do. Copy things in existence. So much for innovation.

Another Funny Article Excerpt 

1984: Madonna shocks the world by writhing on the floor in "Like a Virgin."
2006: Madonna shocks no one by doing a strange jig in "Hung Up." - Seattle Post Intelligencer

Bloggers On Different Sites Read By Millions Slam Madonna's Aged Attempts At Selling Sex

One referred to Madonna's contrived poses in Elle Magazine as "granny porn":

Granny porn. Raye87 January 11, 2006 at 3:52 am

1. I just can’t stand her, her poses are like ewww. She should stop trying to be everywhere. JessGer January 11, 2006 at 2:32 am

2. the middle pic on the second row had some serious amount of airbrushing…..it doesn’t even look real….. BusyBee January 11, 2006 at 2:56 am

3. ug, i cant stand her anymore and she used to be one of my favorites… she's so self-indulgent and self-righteous. no wonder her and gwynnie are bff. she SERIOUSLY needs a tall glass of shut the **** up. scary. justlikehoney January 11, 2006 at 6:20 am

4. Madonna looks worse after her pilates class than when she woke up. [PopSugar]

5. Madge always looks like c***, IMO. let it go, granny! justlikehoney January 14, 2006 at 9:43 am

6. love madonna, but she could add some weight. her face can look like Bettlejuice (and that’s not good) Posted by letinian on 01/19 at 11:15 AM

7. It sounds like Guy wouldn't like it if Madge gained weight. Remember she's older than him, so she probably feels like she HAS to overdo it to hold on to him. The Younger man-older woman relationship has to start showing its warts when the woman starts pushing 50 & the man knows he can still pull 20 year olds. Did anyone see her documentary when he ditched her to go to a pub? Posted by Amena11 on 01/19 at 11:36 AM

8. too skinny and too fugly.. Posted by dirtydirt on 01/19 at 11:59 AM

9. As my cousin said, she needs let it go and give it up. She’s not cool anymore. Posted by Vita on 01/19 at 12:04 PM

10. She makes me ashamed to be a Homo Sapien. Posted by Ol Reg on 01/19 at 01:06 PM

11. 2 words..... Sally O’Malley!!!!!!!! I’m 50! 50 Years Old!! 5-0!! FIFTY!!! Posted by *****-a-licious on 01/19 at 01:42 PM

12. I can’t stand Madonna. She is no longer relevant in today’s society. Give it up Madonna. Just give it up. Even your gay male audience is getting tired of you and your self righteous ****. Posted by robibuni on 01/19 at 01:55 PM

13. has anyone notice that madonna favors more and more, betty davis? someone should post a look alike photo comparison. Posted by wildflower on 01/19 at 02:38 PM

14. Madonna, RETIRE already!!! Posted by PinkHeart on 01/19 at 05:19 PM

1. Does this woman look for the most hideous things to put on her body on purpose? Posted by noneyabusiness on 01/20 at 11:21 AM

2. that is the ugliest head accessory i have ever seen. it looked like someone with no arms crocheted it. Posted by esophagusto on 01/20 at 12:02 PM

3. An international icon and an over-the-hill hooker look a lot alike these days. Posted by Ol Reg on 01/20 at 12:33 PM

4. i <3 green its the bestest and how long has she had that coat? Posted by britsdoitbest on 01/20 at 01:00 PM

5. no...just, no Posted by letinian on 01/20 at 01:19 PM

6. The Chinese believe wearing a green hat means you’re being cheated on by your significant other. I’m not kidding - I read this somewhere, so it has to be true. Posted by meeeow on 01/20 at 02:08 PM

7. She needs to slide that cap down about 6 inches!! ~PARFAIT!!! Posted by *****-a-licious on 01/20 at 02:09 PM

8. YEAH the hat I made in kindergarten for my role as the sparkling green wood elf has made it big!!!I knew it’d be famous someday!! Posted by me again on 01/20 at 02:42 PM

9. Is it St. Patty’s Day already? Posted by Missbrowneyes on 01/20 at 04:14 PM

10. Desperate for paparazzo attention I tell ya Posted by nicole1298 on 01/20 at 05:02 PM -Hollywood Rag

11. Madonna is also familiar with the act of fugging.

12. why does she always leave that gucci sticker on her glasses? wildfire January 19, 2006 at 3:34 pm

13. Why is she still famous? She is old and looks ridiculous in her outfits and esp in her latest video. I personally don’t care to watch her rolling around anymore. EWWWWWWWWW. MadonNO! AlisunMarCo January 19, 2006 at 4:17 pm

14. ick. the way she dresses now, what with the track suits 24/7 and the heavy shapeless coats and sneakers, she has as much sex appeal as a wet dish rag. remember when madonna was cool and relevant? yep, neither do i. justlikehoney January 19, 2006 at 5:23 pm

15. I’m at a loss. lola_k January 19, 2006 at 7:00 pm

16. Madonna is so ******** passe its not even funny...the ***** needs to give it up! luvmelongtime | 01.19.06 - 5:34 pm | #

17. did she buy that from a street vendor (no offense to street vendors!) KatieScarlett | 01.19.06 - 5:34 pm | #

18. Oh, Madgie, just stay in your English manor! You are becoming a cartoon! la mexicana | 01.19.06 - 5:35 pm | #

19. Yeah, I'm pretty sure Bianca Jagger once wore that hat back in the day. LA | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 5:35 pm | #

20. It's hard to tell if that's THE ugliest hat... it's overshadowed by the ugliest sunglasses scout | 01.19.06 - 5:37 pm | #

21. Ugly hat, ugly clothes, ugly girl! BabyFriend | 01.19.06 - 5:38 pm | #

22. There was a point in her career where she could have chosen to age gracefully and continue creating decent music. I used to respect her, she sold out and she ***** now. It's sad to watch someone trying so desperately to remain relevant. So Sad | 01.19.06 - 5:42 pm | #

23. Is there a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow because she looks like a leprechaun. GG's Avatar | 01.19.06 - 5:52 pm | #

24. Is Madge even relevant anymore? heartsflowers | 01.19.06 - 5:54 pm | #

25. madonna's ok. and that hat's not the ugliest thing in the world. but all that green, and something about her face...she reminds me of jim carrey in How The Grinch Stole Christmas. meep | 01.19.06 - 5:56 pm | #

26. Who can still do what at her age? Run around in a purple leotard? The real question is, who SHOULD be doing that at her age? Answer: NO ONE. anonymous | 01.19.06 - 5:59 pm | #

27. she thinks she's 22 Jason | 01.19.06 - 6:03 pm | #

28. looks like a leftover from the st. patricks day parade! Anonymous | 01.19.06 - 6:07 pm | #

29. btw, what old man did she steal her scarf from? Anonymous | 01.19.06 - 6:18 pm | #

30. She looks ridiculous; she is sooooo past expiring that I can smell her from here. Patsy | 01.19.06 - 6:20 pm | #

31. Please don't let the Disco look come back too! MKFan | 01.19.06 - 6:24 pm | #

32. Madge is hideous and is channeling Bette Davis in her late 40's YIKES! Ophelia | 01.19.06 - 7:05 pm | #

33. I wonder if she beat up an Irish Rastafarian for that hat. Or traded some ganja for it. No, she probably bought it and it cost more than my Volvo. 2pinkballoons | 01.19.06 - 7:17 pm | #

34. Looks like something my 3 year old would wear for dress up. Anonymous | 01.19.06 - 7:23 pm | #

35. Dollar store hats rock! MsAstro | 01.19.06 - 7:27 pm | #

36. Madonna is so over, without the Look At Me hat no one would recognize her. ladybug | 01.19.06 - 7:38 pm | #

37. I love the hat, it keeps me from looking at her **** mug. M | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 8:40 pm | #

38. Wait wait, did I miss St. Paddy's day? …Oh...phew, it's still January... Bonnie Blue | 01.19.06 - 8:47 pm | #

39. I got to thinking, and this ***** is only two years older than my mom. Comparatively speaking, Madonna is aging horribly. I'm thinking all of the shiny things, sequins and leotards are to distract from the trainwreck that is her face. marty | 01.19.06 - 8:52 pm | #

40. Christmas is over.. What is that an ornament on her head???? She has gone to far now,., SOFTNESS1 | 01.19.06 - 9:02 pm | #

41. The Gucci glasses are so Madge jumping the shark? I guess that's what ya gotta do when yet another album tanks and your effort to reinvent yourself for the umteenth time, tanks as well. Spanking In LA | 01.19.06 - 10:55 pm | #

42. Weird, why does she never bother to remove the stickers? It just makes her look like a brand whore. Fug. | 01.20.06 - 1:02 am | #

43. Madge is a complete and utter label whore. marmar | 01.20.06 - 1:25 am | #

On her appearance that sparked health fears:

1. Go Madge GO!! Work yourself to death!! Then what good would your royalties from Desperately Seeking Susan do you? HUH? I ask you THAT Question ***** del fuelgo | 01.19.06 - 12:06 pm | #

2. One can only hope....********* | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 12:06 pm | #

3. Thank GOD! Maybe she'll put the ***** *** and the unitards away for good. Princess Sophia | 01.19.06 - 12:07 pm | #

4. Princess, I wonder when Madge does kick from working to death, will she be buried in her ***** *** pink leotard? Lo | 01.19.06 - 12:09 pm | #

5. I am sure she would have aged gracefully but She looks so hard and rough. Could be what England is doing to her. She needs to stick around and teach Lola how to grow up and be a *****. Cause we will need to stories in 10 years of her bad behaviour to keep us occupied. ***** del fuelgo | 01.19.06 - 12:11 pm | #

6. yeah...i think she's still got a little fat on her inner thighs...she should go jogging...on a windy road in the middle of the night during a storm...roller**** | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 12:12 pm | #

7. I might be in the minority on this one but I've always thought she had a weird body. Toned yes, but no hips and weirdly shaped muscular legs. Ophelia | 01.19.06 - 12:12 pm | #

8. Don't forget, she was rough to begin with. Now she's fighting hard to look young, and it doesn't suit her.
********* | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 12:12 pm | #

9. wow. all that exercising and she still finds the time to make wine and keep lourdes from harry potter. madge is a multi-tasking machine.

she should force britney to work out with her. meep | 01.19.06 - 12:13 pm | #

10. Exactly. Her face looks gaunt and ... alienish now. Her cheeks are all sunk in. ****h needs a snickers.
Kara | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 12:14 pm | #

11. She's a businesswoman, not a singer. Her image is the only thing she has. It is good to see it consume her after spending 20+ years having it foisted upon us. Warren | 01.19.06 - 12:15 pm | #

12. I am also not digging her feathered hair. And *** with all the purple lately. I know it is supposed to make you look younger but ******. She is going to go all Michael Jackson on us, and start plastic surgering everything to stay young. Never thought she was pretty, but she had character. Now she just needs to eat a hoho. Cause what is life if you cant have a hoho every now and then? ********** | 01.19.06 - 12:16 pm | #

13. she looks like any one of the zillion trannyfans that emulate her. Fmouie | 01.19.06 - 12:16 pm | #

14. This story isn't true! I look flawless! M | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 12:16 pm | #

15. Lo - I honestly don't think she would want anything else but to be buried in a neon pink, camel-rific unitard complete with her sequined capelet.

WOOOO, Madge, do your kids proud. Shake them flaps! Princess Sophia | 01.19.06 - 12:17 pm | #

16. Isn't this better than a coke and cigarette diet? GG's Avatar | 01.19.06 - 12:21 pm | #

17. calgon, take her away. tim | 01.19.06 - 12:22 pm | #

18. I can only wish that she would work herself to death. heartsflowers | 01.19.06 - 12:23 pm | #

19. "Death on the Dancefloor" Yes! Yes! Put her out of our misery. witcyn | 01.19.06 - 12:27 pm | #

20. i don't understand how these stars are so "busy" when they can find time to work out for 3 hours a day?
hotterthanyou | 01.19.06 - 12:30 pm | #

21. she looks like bettlejuice..the movie, and as much as i love madonna she is overdoing it letinstar | 01.19.06 - 12:39 pm | #

22. Can we say Anorexia? M | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 12:43 pm | #

23. Madge, you used to be cool. Ray of Light was the end for you. Do yourself a favor and hide away in your English manor and don't come back. You would have made yourself a legend if you had pulled a Garbo and not tried to force-feed your "reinventions" to us year after year. Just go away!!! la mexicana | 01.19.06 - 12:48 pm | #

24. Oh yeah, and leave the leotards for Ali Hohan... You are embarrassing Lola!!! la mexicana | 01.19.06 - 12:49 pm | #

25. She's pretty ****** hideous. Kats | 01.19.06 - 12:53 pm | #

26. Fat thighs. Height challenged and is like 5' or 4'11. I'd be embarrassed at 50 to wear that ****t, but she doesn't know the word "humble". Madge you need to work on those fat thighs. They're hideous and you know it. | 01.19.06 - 1:03 pm | #

27. she'd look better with some flesh on her face. and where was that picture taken, a finished suburban basement in NJ?
sarah m | 01.19.06 - 1:20 pm | #

28. She looks like there's not an ounce of estrogen flowing through her body. She probably gets testosterone injections. EAT SOMETHING ALREADY!!! scout | 01.19.06 - 1:23 pm | #

29. LOL sarah m. This pic reminds me of being 11 years old and playing in the basement at my friend's house, dancing to Captain and Tennille and ABBA 45's, trying to act all grown-up and sexy.

Poor crazy old dried-up Madge. paula | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 1:31 pm | #

30. I agree with MK. If she would devote 3 hours a day to writing lyrics or coming up with decent concepts for her music videos she could actually be an innovative artist, instead of just calling herself one. I'll take the plump 80's Madonna over this hollow machine anyday. Anonymous | 01.19.06 - 1:54 pm | #

31. Oh I'm so worried about her...NOT!!! She and *hitney should find a happy medium from opposite sides of the exercise spectrum. StoneyBaloney | 01.19.06 - 1:54 pm | #

32. she is a narcissist she derives supply by being in top shape. it is not good to be like tha when you have a daughter. mark my word laurdes will have a major eating disorder. truthbetold | 01.19.06 - 2:14 pm | #

33. This whole "retro-disco" look she's pushing to promote "Confessions..."-feathered hair, purple leotards, disco balls-is TIRED. It's like when she played out that cowgirl image promoting "Music" a few years ago. It's almost like she doesn't trust her music to sell itself anymore, that it needs some kind of gimmick to garner attention...
Jake | 01.19.06 - 2:42 pm | #

34. madonna dead. works for me. juicy | 01.19.06 - 3:06 pm | #

35. She's Desperately Seeking to Hold Onto Hubbie! Anonymous | 01.19.06 - 3:48 pm | #

36. Poor thing is killing herself to look good for her fans.

Imagine if the rest of these bulimic crack whores would do the same. Or DO ANYTHING for that matter. Overdonna | 01.19.06 - 4:42 pm | #

37. Madonna is my age. And I think her birthday is the same week as mine, even. (Mine is August 19).

If I spent the same amount of time as she does exercising, I bet I could look that skinny, but I don't want to and neither should she, even with what she does for a living. She needs to start embracing her age a bit, she's pathetically trying to pretend she's still in her 20's. I'm not saying dress dowdy, but dress with some CLASS, lady!

She's also WAYYYYYY too skinny. Her face looks haggard. Billie | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 5:06 pm | #

38. She's at that age where every woman must question... My body or my face? Looks like she has chosen and the results are not impressive! The Breakdown | Homepage | 01.19.06 - 5:33 pm | #

39. She's pathetic. Trying to keep up with these young girls. It's not working. She's old and all the exercise in the world is not going to change that. Heemi | 01.19.06 - 6:34 pm | #

40. Does she ever wear anything other than a ******* leotard. What an ego! LOLA | 01.19.06 - 8:49 pm | #

41. madonna seriously cannot accept the fact that she is getting up there in age. popgurl81 | 01.19.06 - 10:39 pm | #

42. Lol. Yes Madonna, slow down on your exercise, and learn to write proper lyrics! Fug. | 01.20.06 - 1:22 am | #

43. I remember seeing Tina Turner when she made her come back. In the Private Dancer videos, and all of the interviews, and photos of Tina (who was 50 at the time??) She looked wonderful.

She had the body, but her face was still fresh, and attractive. She was never haggard, or harsh looking. I don't know if it's just genes or what, but Madge's facial features have not aged well. Cammie | 01.20.06 - 1:36 am | #

On the subject of dining with Brad Pitt:

43. Brad is hot. What i don't get is why do you think he having dinner with Madge, when the rumor is that Brad wants to do another movie with Guy Ritchie. I love Brad but Snatch2 puleese.crybaby | 01.25.06 - 3:52 pm | #

44. Agreed crybaby - Brad was having dinner with guy. His *****bag wife just tagged along.

45. verytime she looked away Guy was probably mouthing "Save me - the ***** is nuts - we have to get out of here" to Brad
boomhaeur | 01.25.06 - 5:23 pm | # - just jared

MUSIC Wall Street gives Warner Bros Music the thumbs down

"Street jeers diskery's good news, Stock gloom rains on Warner Music parade: “Standard & Poor Equity research wasn't impressed and came out with a "Strong Sell" recommendation. It suggested the company's stock should trade at $15 instead of its current price of $19, implying Warner Music is overvalued by more than 25%. With an investigation looming into digital download pricing and music sales generally soft, the country's only stand-alone public music company faces a long and winding road." - Forbes

Not being vindictive, but I agree with the S&P. There isn’t any real growth there. Just firing, reshuffling, stealing, law breaking and bean counting. They aren’t building anything. Vapidity and temporary results are the order of the day.

Also, it’s not a good idea investing in a company that participates in illegal activity. The paper also reported:

"Thomas H. Lee Partners, Bain Capital and Providence Equity Partners, along with Edgar Bronfman, Jr., contributed $1.25 billion of equity to buy Warner Music Group from Time Warner. (Research) Two months later, Warner Music paid its new owners $200 million from the proceeds of a financing, then made three subsequent dividend payments through May of this year that netted the investors an additional $1.23 billion. A Thomas H. Lee spokesman told the paper that some of those payments came out of cash flow rather than debt". – CNN

Bronfman's Big Bonus:

THE BONUS TWO-STEP Shareholders of the Warner Music Group, the newly public company run by Edgar Bronfman Jr., may be surprised to learn that Mr. Bronfman received $6.25 million in bonuses last year when his annual bonus was explicitly capped at $6 million. The lesson in Warner Music's first proxy statement is that there is more than one way to reward a chief executive.

For his performance last year, Mr. Bronfman received $1 million in salary and a bonus of $5 million. But Mr. Bronfman, who owns $65 million worth of the company's stock and is the managing partner of an investment group that owns shares worth $285 million, also received the second half of a $2.5 million "restructuring plan bonus." What is a restructuring plan bonus? That was not covered in the proxy. - New York Times

In other Warner Bros news, they are being sued by Donald Trump for $5 billion dollars, for a libelous book they published about him. Here's hoping Trump gets a decent judge.

The Donald

MUSIC Music Therapy

Research has shown that music therapy is very good for the mind and health. It decreases stress levels. It is also very relaxing. It is thought to increase the intelligence of unborn babies, when classical music is played to them in the womb.

Ever heard a song that just lifts your spirits and makes you feel good. It turns out, it can be medically helpful as well. 

FILM The Golden Globes

There was a serious Christian backlash after the Golden Globes. True to form, Hollywood promoted its gay agenda. One critic made a poignant observation regarding what happened:

"Once again, the media elites are proving that their pet projects are more important than profit. None of the three movies - Capote, Transamerica or Brokeback Mountain - is a box office hit. Brokeback Mountain has barely topped $US25million ($33million) in ticket sales. If America isn't watching these films, why are they winning the awards?" - " Janice Crouse, of Concerned Women for America.

Well said. If people aren’t watching it, why are they winning awards. Then again, the Golden Globes awarded Madonna a Golden Globe for acting (Aisha suppressing laughter).

Who are their benefactors is the question and how much influence on voting do they have.

An article in The Australian pointed out: “The criticism from the American heartland carried more weight than usual this year because Hollywood suffered the biggest decline in attendance in two decades last year.”

"Oscar pundits are now questioning whether the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences will also reward Brokeback Mountain, potentially souring Hollywood’s relationship with the American ticketbuying public even further.

Religious groups also pointed to the alleged political agenda of winners including George Clooney, who won for his supporting role in Syriana, a film about the ethical pitfalls of the oil business; and Mary Louise Parker, who was rewarded for her performance in Weeds, a television comedy about a suburban mother turned marijuana dealer

Much of the anger was directed at the Hollywood Foreign Press Association (HFPA), the group of 92 journalists from non-American publications who hand out the Golden Globe Awards. The Times, along with many other large overseas publications, is not represented at the HFPA.

Right-wing radio talk show hosts also took pot shots at the Globes yesterday. Stephen Bennett, of Straight Talk Radio, said: “When Hollywood is pumping out anti-family movies with sexually explicit, twisted and perverse themes that glorify homosexuality, transsexuality and every other kind of sexual immorality — then awarding itself for doing so — Middle America better take note.

“Last night Hollywood exposed its own corrupt agenda. [It] is no doubt out on a mission to homosexualise America.” - The Times, UK.

FILM “Brokeback Backlash”

World Daily referred to Brokeback as "The rape of the Marlborough Man." 

A story of two male married ranchers named Jack and Ennis (Leave it to a gay film to have the lead character's name rhyme with the word for the male organ) who secretly want to be with each other. Actually, based on reviews I've read, one kept pursuing and stalking the other.

Critic Gene Shalit called that character "a sexual predator," and that he was. Shalit then became the subject of bashing from a gay group.

If a married man hunted down a married woman over and over again as was described between the gay characters in Brokeback, he would have been called a stalker as well. However, a gay group pulled the gay card and attacked Shalit. 

"Critics from the Christian hetero-defensive right include The U.S. Catholic Bishops' Office for Film and Broadcasting, which reversed the Catholic News Service rating, from L for appropriate for "limited adult audiences" to O for "morally offensive." Television personalities Bill O'Reilly and Cal Thomas on Fox News criticized the movie as pro-homosexual propaganda, as did the Concerned Women for America lobby group.

David Kupelian, on the right-wing website Worldnetdaily (wnd.com) asserted that the movie represented nothing less than "the rape of the Marlboro man," as well as an attack on 3,000 years of Judeo-Christian values. Christian talk-show host Stephen Bennett, author of the upcoming book I Was Gay, also attacks the movie as a "moral all-time low" for Hollywood". - The Globe and Mail

I wasn’t up in arms about the film. I just viewed it as something I did not agree with and that it was not for me, so I did not and will not pay to go see it. I’m sorry, but I don’t want to see a film with men making out with each other or doing anything else of that nature with each other. For most straight people, it produces an involuntary gag reaction. I’m not trying to be funny. Literally, for a lot of straight people, it creates an unpleasant, involuntary physical gag and cringe.

I am not hateful towards nor am I afraid of gay people. I do not discriminate against gay people or anyone else for that matter.

However, as a Christian who believes what the Bible says and does her best to adhere to its principles, why should I be forced to love and embrace homosexuality by Hollywood and other pro-gay organizations. I am not gay. Never have been. Never will be. I have that right and to try to force society to embrace and love something that goes against their natural tendencies lest they be blacklisted in Hollywood, libeled and labeled as hateful is plain wrong.

It’s a legal liability as well. Well, you know, unless you pay to bribe the judge to get out of the lawsuit. But the libel and defamation will still cost you money in having to pay to bribe a judge.

FILM The Da Vinci Crock Part 2


I found the above listed web site when I was reading the Our Daily Bread web site. The site disputes many of the fictional claims in the Davinci Code book and film.

This week I also saw a National Geographic documentary about the Last Supper, which revealed the fact that Davinci's painting was in very accurate. The paintings were dissected historically and archaeologically for inaccuracy.

Davinci's painting contained Jesus and His disciples drinking wine out of gold chalices, which was historically and archaeologically incorrect. The standard at the time for their class was stone cups, meaning cups hewn out of stone that could not become ceremonially unclean as coming from the earth, via an unclean animal or rodent crawling on in (i.e. lizards, which were considered unclean animals, as written in the Bible). 

Davinci's painting depicted an opulent room, but archeological discoveries and historical customs and class structure at the time revealed that Jesus lived modestly in a humble earthly abode.

Moreover, according to the documentary, for the poor, whom Jesus was among, the Last Supper, which was a Passover dinner, would have been held on the rooftop, covered by pom pom leaves. Davinci's painting inaccurately shows it indoors in an opulent stone room.

TV NBC’s “Book of Daniel”

NBC's sacrilegious "Book of Daniel" appropriately bombed and was dropped from the schedule. Several NBC affiliates refused to air it as well after a flood of complaints from viewers.

I don’t get NBC. It has been doing very badly, but to dig itself out of a ratings hole, they thought the appropriate answer was to offend the single biggest religious group in the country and the world.

Once again, Hollywood making over Christianity in its image. God doesn’t like makeovers of that sort. He prefers spiritual ones that adhere to His principles of becoming a better person.

What if I were to cast gay characters in a film as straight. Hollywood would scream (and swish) that it is an inaccurate, defamatory portrayal of them.

NBC affiliates in Terre Haute, Indiana; Little Rock, Arkansas; Beaumont, Texas; and Meridian, Mississippi, have refused to air the series premiere Friday night, citing viewer complaints.

"We certainly understand that Christians have difficulties in life, even ministers," Ed Vitagliano, a spokesman for the American Family Association, told the Los Angeles Times after watching the pilot Tuesday night at the NBC affiliate in Memphis. "But this was not a realistic portrayal of a minister's life. This was so far beyond the pale, it was almost a comic strip version."

Vitagliano said the group was offended that the show's creator, Jack Kenny, is gay, as are two of the show's characters.
"We look at that and say, 'If they wanted to try to alienate conservative Christians, they're making every effort to do so,' " he said.

According to Vitagliano, more than 500,000 people have used the American Family Association's Website to email NBC and its affiliates demanding that the show be yanked since the group began its protest. - E Online

TV Michael Eisner To Get A TV Show

"Keys to the Kingdom: How Michael Eisner Lost his Grip," a very revealing book.

Did they not learn from the Charlie Rose episode about this man’s great lack of interviewing skills and rapport. He was terrible. Stoic, segmented and full of self-regard.

CNBC is giving him a show titled "Conversations With Michael Eisner." Yes, and Eisner puts the con in the word conversations.

Side bar: His grown son's name is Breck. You know, like the shampoo. 

 RADIO Howard Stern: Shock Value with No Values

Howard Stern

Shock value. It wears off after a while. It becomes shock value with no values. That’s what Howard Stern has built his little empire on. However, he wouldn’t want anyone to treat his daughters that way.

I was never one that would harp on men turning women into sex objects, but it's become so bad now. I can’t believe how badly he degrades women. Makes you almost ashamed to be one. 

There were media reports that Sirius sales went up since he signed up with them and he has his audience, however, XM still has more subscribers.

But the stuff that’s being put out there is really – degrading. To swim in that level of depravity every day - what does that do to the mind…and his audience. It can’t be good.

There’s entertainment…and then there’s just garbage. He was banned from Clear Channel for indecency for a reason. It just went too far.


So many groupies are writing tell all books these days. These books are negative and unnecessary. Exposing people's sexual exploits and many times degrading them in the process shows a great lack of class.  

But then again, in the world today, many have devalued sex in such a way that it isn't really sacred anymore. For some it's about their hormones and for others it's about money. 

LEGAL FILE Tom Cruise sues

Tom Cruise sued to have an episode of the repugnant cartoon South Park pulled that implied the actor was gay and needed to come out the closet.

Bert Fields managed to have the episode pulled in the UK. Not in America. Fields is slipping.

However, clips of the episode relating to Cruise are all over the internet on blog sites, message boards and fan sites. The episode was titled "Trapped in the Closet." 

LEGAL FILE J-Lo/Marc Anthony & Kevin Costner Lap Top Theft

Both Marc Anthony and actor Kevin Costner had their laptops stolen and the contents held for ransom. Data theft crimes are on the rise. Criminals see computer data, the contents of computers and laptops, as financially valuable.

This type of cyber crime needs to stop. It's flat out illegal and extortion.

In both cases, the police were able to make prompt arrests and return the laptops.

LEGAL FILE Foxy Brown Cuffed and Accused of not really being deaf

Rapper Foxy Brown was berated by Judge Melissa Jackson, who stated she had showed disrespect to the court. I'm amazed at this story for several reasons. How the situation escalated into what it did is really bad.

The judge accused Foxy Brown of not really being deaf - when all medical reports publicly discussed by doctors indicate she is deaf! The worst part in my opinion is when the judge shouted at an officer to hit her when she resisted being handcuffed due to the bangles on her hand getting in the way. Unbelievable.   

"While she was being handcuffed, Ms Marchand shouted at a court officer and, Judge Jackson said, hit her." - BBC

How is it appropriate for a judge to yell to an officer to hit an appellant, make it worse, a deaf appellant. That is abusive and words no judge should ever shout from the bench. It's unjustifiable. 

I don't like what I am witnessing from several judges who have the attitude that they can say and do whatever they want to irrespective of the law, the Constitution and human rights. It's very unbecoming. 

"As Judge Jackson set a date of 23 January for Ms Marchand, 25, to return, she said to the rapper's lawyer Joseph Fleming: "Counsel, she has gum in her mouth." Mr. Fleming denied his client was chewing gum, and told the judge the rapper could not hear her. She has been diagnosed with sudden hearing loss. Ms Marchand opened her mouth and wagged her tongue as if to show her mouth was empty. Judge Jackson ordered the rapper to be handcuffed to the defendants' bench." - BBC

LEGAL Judicial Misconduct: “Bad Judges”

There are some really great judges out there. God bless them. You are needed. They make admirable decisions that reflect the law, truth and justice. I met a very nice civil court judge last year and the man was the picture of gentility. He was kind and respectful to all. He was fair and thoughtful. The world could use more judges like him.

But then there are some really disgraceful judges out there, who wantonly violate the Judicial Cannons, the Constitution and the Law, are abusive, take bribes and corrupt justice.

The web site “Bad Judges and What to do about them” writes of shocking misconduct by judges. From judges masturbating while presiding over cases in full court rooms to others sexually harassing litigants. To judges prejudicially presiding over cases where they have a significant number of stocks in the companies that are appellants to judges flat out taking bribes.

Strange Cases

In Miami, Judge Jon Gordon ruled against a 14 year old girl in favor of billion dollar company Carnival Cruise Lines, when their doctor misdiagnosed her, when she truly had a life threatening medical emergency.

If the girl's parents hadn't went with their gut feeling that something seriously truly wrong with their child, unlike what the doctor was saying, immediately disembarked and took her in for a second opinion, the child would have died on the cruise.

However, Gordon amazingly ruled against the child stating the cruise line is not liable for their doctor, a member of staff they hired, which was absurd, and threw out the case. Gordon's ruling astounded many, to the point that it made the newspapers. The Appeals Court overturned his ruling on appeal.

Warning Signs

Beware of any judge who has a track record of ruling in favor of the million/billion dollar corporation over the individual citizen.

Beware of any judge bald-faced and arrogant enough to verbally abuse and or slander litigants in court, openly show favoritism to one side in a case or render rulings in open violation of the law and the Constitution. That's a judge that doesn't care about the law or the reputation of the court, opting to indulge their personal prejudices, philosophies, ego and sometimes, sadly, bank account.

Beware of activist judges trying to legislate and enforce their own laws from the bench. The Constitution and the law forbids it and rightfully so, as that is not a judge, but a dictator. 

The Constitution is a great document. It was subtlety crafted to point out the fact that no man is above the law…neither is his or her's interpretation thereof.

Television and the movies can be misleading. Basically, judges are required to conduct themselves in a dignified, impartial manner.

Judges would do well to remember this. When you sit on the bench, you are representing your country, your family and your community. To do less than what the law ascribes based on your own philosophies, personal beliefs and prejudices, is betraying your country and committing an act of treason.

Judicial Immunity

Judicial immunity was created with the goal of giving judges the freedom to impartially conduct cases without fear of legal retaliation. It has its purpose. However, some judges have used it as cart blanche excuse to say and do whatever they feel like on the bench, the law be damned.

Federal judges are appointed for life, which sadly, coupled with judicial immunity, is the reason that some, not all, behave so badly on the bench. Too much job security and too little accountability.

Abuses of position and privilege

It is a right as an American to have your day in court. It is a privilege as an American for one to serve as a judge. The keyword being “serve,” as it is a job serving the public. But sometimes, some judges believe this fact is the other way around and that they are to be distinguished as gods.

However, I would like to remind any judge who is verbally abusive…even the real GOD has manners. And the real GOD would do justice with impartiality.

The Bible says, "Woe to unjust judges and legislators," says the Lord, "so that there is no justice for the poor, the widows, and orphans (Isaiah 10:1-2).

Taking an oath in God's name is a serious thing. God help you, you better uphold it, as He chastises violations thereof. The word "woe" in Bible Text/Hebrew means "disfavor" "evil" and or "trouble."

Judges would do well to remember that God is watching them. All the way back to Bible times, He emphatically spoke of His offense at judges who corrupted justice.

Public Confidence

Inappropriate judicial conduct  is very damaging to the legal system, as it undermines the public’s faith in the judicial system and government, when they observe with their own eyes their rights are not being upheld or honored.

Impeachment of Judges

It can be and should be done when appropriate. It should be a subject of interest to you as a member of the public, as many will need to access the judicial system at some point or another.

While being overly litigious is not good, there are times when people’s rights are violated and they opt to seek the justice system for a lawful resolution.

For instance, say you meet in a car accident and need to sue an influential corporation; you will want an honest, virtuous, impartial judge.

Say you are discriminated against at work; you will want an honest, virtuous, impartial judge.  

Say you are sexually harassed at work; you will want an honest, virtuous, impartial judge.

Say you are robbed or defrauded of your possessions; you will want an honest, virtuous, impartial judge.

Not one who will take bribes under the table or be prejudiced against you for being a private citizen, while embarrassingly kissing the butt of wealthy wrong doing defendants.

The Terri Schiavo Case

In my humble opinion, the Terri Schiavo Case is one of the worst cases I have ever read about. It was presided over by Judge George Greer who many want impeached. There's a campaign to do just that. Click the following link to sign the campaign and read the sheer number of laws and judicial cannons Judge Greer violated.


He made the judicial system look merciless and corrupt to the entire world, who openly questioned in various domestic and international publications how something like that was allowed to happen.

Many around the world began to publicly question the integrity of the justice system after his decisions that lead her to starve to death.


There are domestic judicial oversight committees and the United Nations has special sections referring to judicial misconduct all around the world in hopes of eradicating this problem.

There are also grassroots campaigns such as J.A.I.L. (http://www.jail4judges.org/) aimed at cleaning up the judicial system with respect to judges.

In Closing

It is my prayer to God, that by His grace, this will be a year of change and improvement in the judicial system, where the unjust are replaced by God’s grace, with people who will preside over cases impartially and with integrity.

At a time when public confidence in the judicial system is at an all time low, judicial corruption and misconduct need to be addressed.

LEGAL FILE Pentagon Analyst Larry Franklin Sentenced to 12 years

 Pentagon Analyst Larry Franklin

Pentagon Analyst and colonel in the U.S. Air Force Reserve was sentenced to 12 years and 6 months for leaking classified information to an ally.

12 years? I thought it was excessive for what he did. Yes, what he did was wrong in that it was a breach in rules, but 12 years and six months is too much.

He served his country for over 25 years and the information he leaked was to an ally and did not harm the country, so why so much time in prison.

“He (Franklin) contended that the information was already known to the Israelis and that he obtained far more information than he gave away.”

“Judge T. S. Ellis III said at the hearing that he believed Mr. Franklin was motivated by a desire to help the United States, not to damage it.” - Associated Press

Wow, and he still got 12 years and 6 months. After years of service, in an attempt to help the situation in the Middle East, he passed on information to an ally, Israel, and received 12 years. There are people convicted of manslaughter who got lesser sentences.

This man could end up hating his own country over this. I’m not saying he is going to become a domestic terrorist, but think about it…Timothy McVeigh served his country well for years in the army. He received a medal for bravery. But it was reported, after the disappointment of not passing the grueling test to become a Green Beret, which was his longtime dream, he inappropriately and inexplicably turned on his country and in a horrible way.

What he did was utterly wrong, but what triggered McVeigh's turn was far less than what’s happened to Franklin for passing secrets to an ally. I know the government has to maintain order and discourage such conduct, as passing classified info is very wrong, but under the circumstances, his sentence is way too high.

I’d have given Colonel Franklin 2 years – 1 year in jail and 1 year on monitored house arrest – and let him keep his pension, with the proviso that he could not work for the government again or hold office.

One has to be careful of how they treat people in such situations. If a man is left to rot in prison for a long time for trying to help, not harm his country, in a situation where he broke a rule, but no one was hurt, he will grow embittered and hateful towards his country that he once served and tried to protect.

LEGAL FILE Are Hate Speech Laws Democratic

Are hate speech laws in several countries democratic and fair or do they bar free speech. A person should be able to say whatever they want, so long as it is not a threat of violence or to incite violence. If it is libel, the libeled can sue.

But lines are being blurred and dangerously so, by pro-gay groups that don’t want a negative word said about homosexuality. In some cases it is being reduced to some reasoning: he or she said they don't like me or my lifestyle, so it's hate speech, a hate crime and I wanna sue. That's dangerous territory. That's not the true purpose of hate speech laws. 

INTERNET Wikipedia, what hath thou wrought

I used to really enjoy the web site Wikipedia, but now vandals posing as contributors who defame public figures in inserting baseless opinions as fact have overrun it. It is also overrun by Muslim extremists defaming Christian and Jewish figures in an encyclopedia of all places, which is supposed to be neutral. I have witnessed this anti-Semitic and anti-Christian slant in numerous Wikipedia articles.

The site, who lets anyone with a computer edit, has people who oddly feel some strange sense of power in writing inaccurate, defamatory articles with no proof or basis in reality, about people and removing their accomplishments, as though it some how negates it in real life.

The vandalism is so bad at Wikipedia, that they even had to lock the front-page titled “Wikipedia” because someone or someones kept vandalizing it. That’s the point where you have to stop and ask yourself, “What am I doing and what needs to be improved here.”

It's an exercise in futility. The inmates taking over the asylum. Tabloids r’ us time. Wikipedia is fast becoming unreliable and defamatory thanks to an unregulated handful of people.

The people with good linguistic and literary skills and no agenda are leaving the site in droves, as it is not worth the harassment and nuisance of writing something, only for a zealot or defamer to delete it minutes later on a daily basis. That's just ridiculous.

If I wrote about the founder some of the things regularly featured on Wikipedia he would sue me. Therefore, he needs to do more to regulate his own project.

Opening a site to the public and letting them edit it, has its merits, but does not exempt you from the legal consequences of defamation and libel - worldwide. There are precedents where authors, writers, doctors and members of the public have sued web sites for libel and defamation over lesser transgressions on internet sites, even as simple as message boards and won. You need to do more to police it. 

NATIONAL NEWS Civic Duty: Tracie Dean 

Tracie Dean [Pic courtesy of News 11 Alive]

By God's grace, thanks to the efforts of a courageous, intuitive Georgia woman, Tracie Dean, and a fearless Alabama police officer, Brian Davis, two children were rescued from the clutches of a sex offender. Both Dean and Davis deserve medals for what they did.

That is the definition of civic duty. Them caring about their fellow man, coupled with persistence, saved two innocent children from further sexual abuse. God bless you both for your efforts.

[Photos courtesy of News 11 Alive]

“It’s just awful to think of someone raping a 3-year-old,” Dean said.

“She came over to me and said ‘Hi.’ I said ‘Hi.’ She wandered off,” Dean said. The girl walked away with the older man. “It just didn't feel right. There was tension between the two of them. He wasn't nice to her. Not a warm person at all,” Dean said.

She took down the Washington state license tag number on their vehicle and called 911 after she left the service station. A dispatcher told her the two checked out okay, but Dean said when she got home to Decatur she didn't give up her inquiry into the strange pair.

For about four days, Dean searched missing children’s databases on the Internet, missing children’s organizations, ‘America’s Most Wanted’, and various law enforcement agencies that didn’t seem interested in her concern.

She then drove the nearly 300 miles back to the convenience store in Alabama to look at the store’s surveillance tape. A local Sheriff’s deputy happened to walk into the store at the time and agreed to look into the matter.

Dean said she learned that the 3-year-old she’d said “Hi” to wasn’t missing, but still desperately needed help. Clues led the deputy to a mobile home in Alabama, where the horror story of extensive child abuse at the hand of a convicted sex offender, police said, began to disturbingly unfold.

Police arrested Wiley for repeatedly raping the 3-year-old and sodomizing her older brother. Officers also arrested Cavender, charging her with two counts of child molestation.

Investigators say Glenna Faye Cavender and Wiley were drifters who traveled around America selling souvenirs at stock car races, and that Wiley was suspected of molesting an estimated 40 other children in several other states." - Alive News at 11

NATIONAL NEWS The Miners: End Result of Corruption and Negligence

My condolences to the families and friends of the miners who died in West Virginia. It was a senseless, preventable tragedy and someone needs to be held accountable for it. Those precious lives are gone because of cutting corners and exerting influence. No amount of money can ever compensate for that.

What's worse is a whole town feels that a price was put on their loved ones' safety and ultimately their lives, by an unscrupulous business man described as a corporate raider. The mine had numerous safety violation citations that, based on news reports, were not enforced.

On Sunday, both the National Mining Association and the United Mine Workers of America said they, too, will press for change.

"This is a time for all of us who share responsibility for mining safety to come together and look for ways to make mining safer," said Carol Raulston, spokeswoman for the National Mining Association in Washington, D.C. "We have made dramatic improvements over the last 15 years, but there's more to be done."

Mine workers president Cecil Roberts said Congress and state legislatures must take steps to ensure existing regulations are strictly enforced.

"We must also develop new initiatives that will give every miner a vastly improved chance to walk out of a mine after an accident, alive and well and safe in the arms of their loved ones," he said.

The UMW also supports requiring oxygen caches throughout mines, as Peabody Energy and Consol Energy Inc. do at some of their larger mines.

"It's always been our position if it takes you eight hours to walk out of a mine, then there ought to be eight hours of oxygen for you to do that," Smith said.

"We need Congress to look at this. We need state legislatures to look at this," he said. "But we need action." - The Associated Press

NATIONAL NEWS Spying Program

I have been reading many web sites for feedback and looked at many polls and it is clear Americans on the whole are not comfortable with the NSA domestic spying program. The public, now more than ever, are paranoid and are repeating the well known phrase "Big brother is watching you."

While I understand the government is in a precarious situation with terrorists obsessively plotting crimes against the country, America is a country built on checks and balances. Americans treasure that.

I know desperate times sometimes call for desperate measures, but the peace of mind of the country is very important as well.

Even a cursory search of internet articles, blogs, message board postings and professional journalists op-eds, reveals there needs to be checks and balances to the program i.e. warrants, even after the fact, for the peace of mind of the country.

Warrants after the wiretaps are placed is a good idea. A private, guarded record of these specific wiretaps available to the other branches of government. Everyone needs to work together or the situation is going to deteriorate more and more, which is counter-productive. The other branches of government have voiced their disapproval. They clearly feel left in the dark. They resent it and are rallying against it, but everyone needs to work together and be kept up to speed.

There is a lack of harmony among the branches of government concerning this program in that there are members of the public and Democrats and Republicans in office against it in its current state. But people seem willing to work with the program, provided it is altered to include wiretap warrants, even after the fact.

Information regarding the existence of the program was leaked by the New York Times, meaning someone inside the program had to have leaked it to said paper, further jeopardizing its covertness.

The program clearly has some kinks that can and should be worked out. An article in the New York Times stated:

"Spy Agency Data After Sept. 11 Led F.B.I. to Dead Ends" - January 17, 2006 NY Times: after the Sept. 11 attacks, the National Security Agency began sending a steady stream of telephone numbers, e-mail addresses and names to the F.B.I. in search of terrorists. The stream soon became a flood, requiring hundreds of agents to check out thousands of tips a month. But virtually all of them, current and former officials say, led to dead ends or innocent Americans." - NY Times


FBI Director- Robert Mueller was mentioned in the article.

Mueller, known in intelligence circles by his code name: Macaroni Man. Get it, Mueller's Macaroni. I knew I'd seen his name somewhere before. Just kidding. He'll probably investigate me back to the time I was 2 for that joke.


"As the bureau was running down those leads, its director, Robert S. Mueller III, raised concerns about the legal rationale for the eavesdropping program, which did not seek court warrants, one government official said. Mr. Mueller asked senior administration officials about "whether the program had a proper legal foundation," but ultimately deferred to Justice Department legal opinions, the official said." - January 17, 2006 NY Times

There needs to be cohesion on this issue for the sake of the American people who are clearly concerned based on statements many have made.

This is not to say anything against the President or the government, but the public genuinely seem worried about the program. At the end of the day, in any country, the people are who are most important - not just their safety, but their peace of mind as well.


This story was just astounding. Drug dealers built a 5 foot wide, 6 foot high, 2400 foot long tunnel with a pulley system that runs from Mexico to California, and used it to transport illegal immigrants and drugs. The discovery was made by the Mexican government and they should be applauded for standing up to such corruption, especially in the face of potentially terrible retaliation from local kingpins who sometimes terrorize officials. 


Is the world going bankrupt. I read that there is a surge in bankruptcy rates in several major countries. I think it is due to credit, as it's not that people all over the world aren't earning anything, because they are. However, too much credit, above one's income, which can accumulate after a couple years, can and has spelled financial disaster for many. Less buying on credit is the answer.


A Flock of Seagulls

When I hear the word Iran, ironically I think of that 80's song “I Ran” by A Flock of Seagulls.

Iran Prime Minister Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. His name just made my Microsoft spellchecker go crazy.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the Ayatollah reenacting scenes from Brokeback Mountain. I'm just kidding.

But I digress, the Prime Minsiter of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has been saying and doing some very disturbing things. In particular, his nuclear ambitions that have alarmed many in the world community.

It’s amazing that three countries want to refer the matter to the UN, yet Iran isn’t afraid. That sends a very bad signal – of defiance. "We are not worried about our nuclear case to be sent to the Security Council," Abdolreza Rahmani-Fazli, deputy secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told state television. - Reuters

Why are you not afraid. What could possibly give Iran’s leaders such confidence under very bad circumstances. Makes you wonder.

Is it that they do not regard the U.N. or are that confident in what they hope the leveraged end result of their conduct will be.

On the one hand the Iranian Prime Minister claims, “We would like to send the message to those who claim Iran is searching for nuclear weapons that there is no such policy and this [policy] is illegal and against our religion."

But what about all these suicide bombings the world reads about every week in the papers. What about the London bombings, September 11th, the bombing in Spain. These are against your religion, but they were carried out by people claiming to be Muslims nonetheless. You’re not giving the world much to work based on the track current track record.

Religiously engrained – how can one argue with someone so set in their ways, believing their deeds to be the will of God. God never willed the Jews non-existent. They have survived serious adversity and grown stronger than ever.

Here’s what I don’t like about his statements. He said they are not making nuclear weapons, then in the next breath he calls for Israel to be “wiped off the map.” It has a certain look to it.

That is a vile, inhumane wish, sir. No one should wish to see any country of this world we inhabit wiped off the map. We are all citizens of this world that the living God Almighty, gave the right to dwell in His world.

This world does not belong to you or I. And it greatly upsets me that anyone would wish to wipe any country off the face of this earth.

The Jews have a right to live and dwell in Israel. It is a God given right. Each man has the right to dwell in his own country. That is a legal universal right as well. The Jews have the right to legally move about this earth, just like everyone else, to any country that grants them admittance. They’ve got just as much right to live as you do.

The world recognizes you as a nation, therefore you should recognize all the countries of the world as individual nations as well.

World Peace v. World Love

World peace will not be achieved in modern times so long as elected officials harbor views of wiping another country off the planet. Such a desire says it all.

God in His wisdom made this world and it wasn’t for anyone to wipe any nation off the face of His earth.

While I may not agree with the popular view of every country on the planet, I do not wish ill on any country, neither do I want any nation wiped off the planet.

Feeling this way, it makes me concerned that anyone could get to the point that they wish another nation into oblivion. Those are intense feelings of hatred that are dangerous not only to said nation, but the world aka nuclear fall out.

Not to mention, all it takes is for one country's leader to lose his patience and launch an attack, then another country's leader to lose his patience and launch an attack, then another country's leader to lose his patience and launch an attack, then the world as we known it will cease to exist, period.

I ask you, what good is your ideologies of hate if you are dead and don't live to see the end result for anytime.

If you do not like someone, leave them alone. Let them live their lives and you live yours. World peace doesn't have to be world love in its inception. It can be the understanding that we agree to disagree and acknowledge each others right as nations to be left alone. 

It is my hope that one day all people will love each other, but it will clearly take God to accomplish that.

Dealing With Nuclear Weapons: World Safety

A scenic picture of Iranian capital Tehran

"Iran's nuclear program began when the Shah purchased a research reactor from the U.S. in 1959. The Shah had big plans for a network of 23 power reactors, but the U.S. did not consider this a danger, because he was an ally, and he did not ask for technologies to enrich or reprocess spent nuclear fuel." - USA Today

Nuclear science is not rocket science. What about the side effects on the citizens of Iran. They are important too. What if there is a bad nuclear accident. It is going to affect them first and poison the waters. That caliber of pollution is not pretty.

The bad thing with these unsafe nuclear programs is it creates weather disturbances in the world. It can produce Tsunamis, horrible earthquakes and terrible storms. The earth isn’t built to withstand that type of trial and error experimentation.

SOCIAL ISSUES Elton John Slams Jamaicans as “Hostile”

Elton looking Brokebackish (get it, looking glasses and he is openly gay)

The Queen of Pop, Elton John, slammed Jamaicans as hostile. Why I never…-Aisha unplugs her Russell Crowe phone and throws it at Elton-.

Just kidding. Don’t get your feathers in a twist. Seriously, I read he likes feathers.

A recent editorial in the Jamaica Gleaner newspaper rebuffed Elton John for stating to a press outlet that Jamaicans are hostile towards homosexuals. He also slammed the Taiwanese.

You know, I saw a clip of "Tantrums and Tiaras" and I can't fathom how Elton could have the audacity to call anyone hostile with a straight face, pardon the pun. I gotta say, David Furnish seems like a sweet man - cause only a sweet man could take that kind of galeforce tantrum. 

For the record, I do not condone or support violence against gay people. I think people should be able to live their lives in safety, whether straight or gay, wherever they live in the world.

However, you cannot force people to love your lifestyle. I do not agree with the gay lifestyle, as I am a Christian, and it  doesn't appeal to me (especially with men that look like Michael Ealy in existence), but I digress...what was I talking about again? Oh yea, Michael Ealy. No, I was talking about Elton John...

While I agree that there have been cases of violence against gays in Jamaica, not more than any other country. In fact the statistics show there is less violence against gays in Jamaica than several other countries.

So why single out Jamaica, when statistics in America, England, Germany, Africa, Latvia, Croatia, Ecuador and Honduras, among several other countries, show there are more cases of violence against gays in many other countries.

It is clear it is a worldwide problem. Singling out one country isn't gonna solve anything - just lose you support among the people who didn't have an opinion on homosexuality either way, as now you are slandering them due to their nationality, for the actions of a few. That is not right.

What if a Jamaican said all gays are like the gay man the Met Police arrested with over one million images of child porn and abuse on his computer, or like Edward Stokes (arrested for molesting over 200 teens), child molesters. John would be furious. Therefore, how is his statement about Jamaica fair. Isn’t that stereotyping…the very thing gay people hate when it is done to them.

Me personally, I have never been hostile towards any gay person.  

I've never liked the world homophobic either. Makes it sound like one is fearful or afraid. I am not afraid of gay people. I am not afraid of any human. I do not hate anyone.

The gay lifestyle is a choice and not everyone is going to applaud it. Just like there are things gays don't applaud either - Christianity. 

The fact of the matter is, Christianity is the largest religion in the world and it forbids homosexuality. Judaism is another religion, with millions of members, that forbids homosexuality. Islam is another religion, with millions of members, that forbids homosexuality. The world is largely comprised of religions that for thousands of years has forbidden homosexuality.

While I do not agree with violence against gay people, as a Christian it is my right to peacefully adhere to my faith in not practicing or promoting homosexuality, just like billions of other people on the planet who believe the same. It is my right not to promote or go see a gay movie, as it goes against my natural nature and it is not something I wish to watch. Myself and others have that right.

Being gay is a choice. If it is what you chose, it is your right. You do not however, have the right to force other people to embrace the gay lifestyle, practice or promote it.

That is an infringement of others rights that would put you in unlawful territory.

The entertainment industry, with access to the media, is not even one percent of the world, but it thinks it is the spokesperson and owner of the world.

Reciting lines into a camera does not qualify one as God. Nor does singing lines into a microphone. At the end of the day we all have our rights and individuality.

I am a peaceful person. I’ve never even owned a rock…well, that’s not true there are loads of rocks in my garden, but I’ve never thrown them at people. That was a joke.

But seriously, I have never physically started a fight with anyone in my life. I have never assaulted anyone. I have never owned a gun or any type firearm. I have never owned explosives, grenades, bomb making materials ect. That’s not my shtick.

However, I am not going to destroy other people’s rights to own a gun or legal things of that nature. Just like I’m not going to destroy anyone’s right to practice their faith.

The problem in society sometimes is the inability of people to agree to disagree and coexists peacefully.

To slander a whole sovereign nation of millions of people as “hostile” is positively foul, uncivil and defamatory – but I can’t say I didn’t expect it from Elton, who often lets his temper get the best of him.

You have the right to believe what you believe, but what you stated on the BBC, in characterizing all Jamaicans as “hostile” qualifies as slander and “hate speech,” the latter something European laws strictly forbid.


It’s not just Jamaicans who have taken issue with gay marriage and the disgraceful attempt to try to phase out the world “marriage.”

Me for one, I like the word marriage. Girls love to say they hope to get married one day. Little girls and adolescent females do not want to be talking about and dreaming about their “civil union day” or “getting civil unioned” one day.

But this is where this is going because some activist gay people are offended at the word marriage. We cannot do away with the word marriage nor its concept so as not to offend people. That’s ridiculous.

Accept, acknowledge and realize a “marriage” and a “civil union” are two completely different things that will never be equated with each other.

The wonderful institution of marriage must not be destroyed via political correctness. Next thing you are gonna hear is someone trying to pass a law to outlaw the word “marriage” as hate speech:

OFF THEIR WEDS - Word 'marriage' removed so gays aren't offended. THE word "marriage" is being taken off register office signs - in case it offends gay couples entering into a civil partnership. Councils are following guidelines which also suggest altering couples' stationery from "Your Wedding" to "Your Ceremony".

Wolverhampton Register Office's two marriage rooms have been renamed ceremony rooms while the Crown Marriage Suite in Stourbridge is now the Crown Suite after recommendations from the Local Authorities Coordinators of Regulatory Services.

Pastor Paul Chamberlain from nearby Kingswinford blasted: "Political correctness is rearing its ugly head."

Elton John and David Furnish became one of the first couples to have a civil partnership last month. - mirror.co.uk

Others have spoke of their views that marriage is between and man and a woman.

Pope John Paul II stated civil unions, "Cannot be applied to unions between persons of the same sex without creating a false understanding of the nature of marriage. "The institution of marriage necessarily entails the complementarity of husbands and wives who participate in God's creative activity through the raising of children. Spouses thereby ensure the survival of society and culture, and rightly deserve specific and categorical legal recognition by the State. Any attempts to change the meaning of the word 'spouse' contradict right reason: legal guarantees, analogous to those granted to marriage, cannot be applied to unions between persons of the same sex without creating a false understanding of the nature of marriage."

The new Pontiff has retained and reiterated this position as well.

Hillary Clinton, a liberal, even stated, "Marriage, has got historic, religious, and moral content that goes back to the beginning of time, and I think a marriage is as a marriage has always been: between a man and a woman."

Orthodox Jewish community in Lakewood New Jersey opposed a new stadium that developers wanted built on their land in their community with leaders stating:

"We don't want to have Elton John over here," Yehuda Shain, a former township committee candidate, said, quoting the sentiments of others he'd spoken to. "We don't want our kids to go there. We don't want our adults to go there. We should not support it."- Asbury Park Press

The article further stated: “While the numbers may work, could the project advance if the Orthodox community — the largest ethnic group in Lakewood — wouldn't go to the arena?

Orthodox support was needed because the township land on which the arena would have been built is under contract to the for-profit Beth Medrash Govoha, the downtown rabbinical college that has transformed Lakewood into one of the country's largest Orthodox communities.” - Asbury Park Press

Therefore how is Elton going to single out Jamaicans when many people around the world from a broad cross section of social and political views do not agree with gay marriage. Even many people within Britain.

I’m not trying to hurt gay people and I certainly would never physically attack you. I wouldn’t discriminate against you. I have no hatred in my heart towards you. But you can’t ask people to throw their religion/beliefs out the window to champion your lifestyle.


Pics courtesy of http://www.drugfree.org

Roofies AKA GHB. I'm sure many of you have heard of them. Many a woman have been raped thanks to GHB. That's a cruel thing to do to a woman.

Project GHB defines it as, "Made From: gamma butyrolactone (GBL) and Sodium Hydroxide or Potassium Hydroxide - basically it is degreasing solvent or floor stripper mixed with drain cleaner."

It's something that can be easily slipped into a drink. It is colorless and odorless, but can damage the body. It leaves the woman incapacitated and men have taken advantage of women sexually in that situation. It's a very cowardly thing to do.

Women, be careful of who you trust and where you leave your drink. Don't let anyone back you into a corner or get you into a situation where things can go terribly wrong in this matter.   

RACE RELATIONS Nazi Reparations

Maria Altmann, true heir of Nazi looted art

A judge in Vienna ruled that art stolen by Nazis should be returned to their rightful owner, Maria Altmann, a California Jewish woman and heir. You go girl!

VIENNA, Austria - Austria is legally obligated to return five paintings by Gustav Klimt to the heir of a Jewish family, an arbitration court suggested in a ruling made public Monday, indirectly backing the family's claims that the pictures were stolen by the Nazis. - Associated Press

While the ruling was not binding, lawyers for both the family and the government have said they would abide by it to end a seven-year legal struggle over who owns the paintings, estimated to be worth at least $150 million.

Aside from its returning valuable art objects, Austria also has returned properties in government possession that were looted by the Nazis.

The country also began paying compensation to Nazi victims from a $210 million fund endowed by contributions from the federal government, the city of Vienna and Austrian industries.

The fund was created in 2001 to compensate those stripped of businesses, property, bank accounts and insurance policies under the Third Reich.

Austria was among the most fervent supporters of Adolf Hitler. But recognition of the need for restitution was delayed because for decades history books depicted the country as Nazi Germany's first victim, through annexation in 1938.

Vienna was home to a vibrant Jewish community of some 200,000 before World War II. Today, it numbers about 7,000.

I applaud Austria for its efforts. Apology and restoration are big steps towards healing.

RACE RELATIONS Can’t We All Just Get Along

Many jokingly refer to Rodney King's now famous statement "Can't we all just get along," after the racially motivated beating he received, but there is a lot of truth in that simple declaration.

Countries are threatening other countries, white supremacists in America, Germany, England and other parts of Europe are gearing up for what they feel will be future race wars and terrorists are terrorizing the free world who aren't Muslim. 

Why can't we just live in peace. I know it's a naive thing to say, but really, if you try, it's not that difficult.

RACE RELATIONS Is One Race Better Than Another

Is one race better than another? I don’t think so. Never have. I think people have their preferences, but I don’t think one race has got it over any other.

At the end of the day we are all human. We all bleed. We all have feelings. Believe it or not, we have a lot in common.

RACE RELATIONS Race and Culture - Hang Ups and Stereotypes

Skin Color – We all have different skin colors. In this world you will find just about every shade of skin.Yet some have the weird view that they don't want to touch others of a different skin color like it's gonna rub off.

Some black people take the stand of racially offend, before you are racially offended, as sort of a protective mechanism. As much as you may get to racists doing this, you will also hurt non-racist non-black people who could potentially be a really good friend to you.

Hair Texture – Much like skin color, there are also lots of hair textures. Some people have hang ups about this. I’ve heard people deride Caucasoid hair and I have heard others deride Negro hair.

Now I’m not gonna write the slurs I’ve heard both white people and black people use, but all of it is unnecessary.

God made varying textures of hair. Therefore, no one should disparage anyone’s hair texture. It’s very unkind.

Cultural Lingo – Different races and cultures have lingo unique to each. Once again, I have heard black people making fun of lingo they deem white and white people making fun of lingo they deem black.

All of you, black and white, are wrong and closed minded. I'm open minded - I make fun of every race including my own (just kidding).

Cultural Food – I have heard people of different cultures and different races deride each other’s food. Once again, not appropriate and culturally offensive.

Cultural Holidays and Traditions – Cultural holidays and traditions sometimes don’t share race, sometimes they share geographic boundaries. Still, we must understand that different holidays hold significance for different people, even if we ourselves don't celebrate it.

“They’re Just Different” - How many times have you heard that phrase. I think it's a cop out. An excuse.

Ever heard someone try to excuse their prejudices against other races by saying that phrase. Can’t really tell you how another race is so different, but to stay in their little racially safe and self-approved bubble, they say that.

While, we are different in some ways, we’re not all that different that any of us should scorn or be scorned for that. We need to appreciate our differences. Not scorn each other with them.

Walking around with a chip on your should is very burdensome and taxing. Who needs it. You’ll have a better life without said prejudices. You won’t walk around with all these hang-ups and feelings of resentment for those you don't want to understand.

“(Fill in the blank) race is the best looking”

How many times has that claim been made by different races. I don’t think any one race is better looking than the other. I think beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

When someone is in love with someone, that person is the best looking person in the world to them.


When you think the worst of people – all black people are this (fill in the blank) or all white people are that (fill in the blank), you are lumping together scores of people you don't know and painting them with the same brush of prejudice. 

In Closing

It seems like the races are always competing with each other – and it gets annoying to read that stuff after a while. Who’s the best. Who’s the smartest. Who’s achieved the most. Oh, who cares. Let it go already.

I think if we aim to learn more about each other and appreciate each other more, these differences would not be a problem or cause for fear.

Try to rid yourself of all the negativity. Try to make a genuine effort to understand people more. To learn more about people. And most of all, use kindness and consideration when approaching matters of race and culture.

CHARITY Giving to Charity

Giving to charity is great. Some undervalue its benefits. Not only does it make you feel good, it's your own little way of helping others. Things you yourself may not be able to get out there and do, the culminative effort of donations from yourself and others, can help bring about change.

SPIRITUAL Divide and Conquer

Cults are notorious for using the concept of divide and conquer. The Kabbalah cult specializes in it. There are many stories surfacing from people who were fleeced by the cult estranging them from family, friends and the people they date.

Isolation is a key part of brainwashing. It is the act of isolating a person from the world, sanity, voices of reason in the form of sensible people who see through what is being done to their loved one. That combined with food and sleep deprivation can create dangerous results i.e. brainwashing.

A member of the U.S. Army drawn in by the cult told of how they convinced him his girlfriend was Satan and to leave her, which he did. Others told of being estranged from their spouses at the behest of the Kabbalah center.

How could it possibly be a good thing that any organization drives wedges between spouses and family members.

SPIRITUAL Ingratitude

"If a man returns bad for good, trouble will not leave his house."- Proverbs 17:13

A simple, but powerful statement. It was God's way of saying if someone does something kind for you, don't repay their kindness with evil, as He is watching.


There is nothing to fear but fear itself (and the boogie monster – don’t forget the boogie monster.) Just kidding.

Franklin D. Roosevelt said that. Clearly he'd never been audited. Just kidding.

I get what he was saying, but people who have seen “Swept Away’ would disagree with Mr. Roosevelt. Scaryyy! No disrespect intended to Mr. Roosevelt (but disrespect intended to “Swept Away”).

Fear can be terrible. Ever seen someone try to get over a phobia like flying. Ever seen someone truly terrified. It’s so sad. The adrenalin is in overdrive. People run faster, talk faster, scream louder, you name it. All byproducts of fear.

If fear can be conquered in a person's life, a lot can be achieved. Even if it's conquering the basic fear of failure. Fear of getting older. Fear of tomorrow.

You can't live your life with that kind of stress. Make an effort to think positively and have faith, not fear.

SPIRITUAL The Brain vs. The Soul

I’ve read stories of scientists preserving the brains of men like Einstein for scientific research. A few years ago, I read an article on Einstein that compared his brain to those of others.

Who the person is, is harnessed in the soul, not the brain and the soul cannot be harnessed by man. Only by God. The soul is spiritual and the sole property of God.

The soul, not the brain, contains the will to live, the will to create, creativity, the spirit of excellence and the drive to accomplish and achieve greatness.

Sometimes people do such great, unexplainable things that it can only be attributed to God. The blessings God puts in the soul of a man cannot be harvested or harnessed. It is via the grace and will of God, not the ingenuity of man.

You have children in this world, prodigies, who are born brilliant.

You’ve seen the little brats, oops I mean children on TV. At age 3 playing the piano like adult virtuosos (No, I’m not jealous, really) or the others who exhibit a strong gift for science and mathematics at an early age. Those are gifts from God that He places in the soul. The spirit of a man.

SPIRITUAL Disobedience

The dictionary defines the word Disobedience as the “Refusal or failure to obey.” Disobedience is a subject the Bible went over many times. Disobedience was defined as defying God and or deliberately not doing what one knows is right. It is an alternate course other than what you know to be the right one.

God reveals through the Bible that He has a plan and purpose for everyone. He also allows us to participate via free will - the ability to make our own choices.  

However, when you do what you know is wrong and reject the path of virtue, you are in essence rejecting God’s choice.

When you reject God's plan, there's only one other plan - the Devil’s i.e. misery, heartache and devastation.

Sadly, this can spill over into the lives of the people around you via the questionable choices you made. Today, choose to get back on the right path.


© Copyright 2002 - 2020 AG. All Rights Reserved. Web site design by Aisha for Sonustar Interactive

Aisha | Goodison Trust | Sonustar News | Judiciary Report | Sound Off Column | Celluloid Film Review | Consumer News Reviews | Compendius | United Peace Initiative | Justice And Truth | American Justice System Corruption | Medicine And Science Times