« The Benefits of Bush Bashing | Main | War Coverage »

Christmas Trees Being Returned to Seattle Airport

The other day I linked to an article from the King 5 News that reported that the Christmas trees at the Seattle Airport were being removed after a Rabbi threatened to sue if he couldn't put up a Menorah display. This is what the report said:

SEA-TAC Airport - All 15 Christmas trees inside the terminal at Sea-Tac have been removed in response to a complaint by a rabbi.


A local rabbi wanted to install an 8-foot menorah and have a public lighting ceremony. He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn't put up, and gave a two-day deadline to remove the trees.

Sea-Tac public affairs manager Terri-Ann Betancourt said the trees that adorn the Sea-Tac upper and lower levels may not properly represent all cultures.

She said that since this is their busiest time of year and they don't have time to add a fair representation of all cultures, her department decided to take down all of the decorations, review their policies, and decide if they need to make a change for next year.

Today we hear that the Seattle Airport is putting the trees back and that the Rabbi never wanted the trees come come down in the first place:

The removal of the trees sparked a public outcry over what some say was political correctness run amok and part of a trend to adopt a secular tone toward Christmas.


Harvey Grad, the rabbi's attorney, said it was never Bogomilsky's intention to have the trees removed and the rabbi was "saddened" by the port's decision to remove all holiday decorations instead of including the Menorah for Hanukkah.

"We are not part of the war on Christmas," said Grad. "All we asked for was inclusion and now we're getting hate mail and angry messages."

The Chabad of Greater Seattle asked the airport to put the trees back and will not pursue any legal action even if the airport does not include the menorah into this year's holiday decorations.

In a statement, the Port of Seattle said it removed the trees to avoid litigation with a religious group, which wanted to install the menorah and hold a lighting ceremony.

"The airport is not a traditional public forum and it would not be appropriate for such a ceremony, so we made the decision to remove the trees to allow the airport staff to focus on the busy travel season," the Port said on its Web site.

The media got this really wrong when it accused the rabbi of threatening to sue if the Menorah didn't go up. Pamela at Atlas Shrugs video taped Bill O'Reilly's interview with the rabbi where he clarified his intentions. She also wrote this at her site:

Got to give a tip of the ole hat to O'Reilly on this one. I too was pissed at the Seattle Rabbi that "ruined Christmas"! And I got a lot of mail from angry readers as well. But, we were wrong.


Thank the jihad media once again for stirring the pot and putting its leftarded slant (with a healthy dose of Jew hatred) on an otherwise innocuous story. The jihad media claimed the beleagured Rabbi was going to sue the Seattle airport to remove the trees if they didn't display a menorah. Blackmail! Of course the Rabbi could not refute the lies because the story broke on Friday night into Saturday ...... you know the deal. Shabbat.

Lies lies lies ...............we have to listen to the jihad loving media talk about the alleged "humiliation" of the 6 terror imams, but a Jew wants to display a menorah? Ass-ume the worst? Horrors........

Very good point, Pamela. I didn't offer any comments one way or the other on the original story, but I feel bad for even linking to such an inaccurate report.

Update: One of the liberal trolls in our comments section is arguing that I am the one who is inaccurate in this post, that the media did not get it wrong.

Let's look at this one more time:

The original report said this:

A local rabbi wanted to install an 8-foot menorah and have a public lighting ceremony. He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn't put up, and gave a two-day deadline to remove the trees.

That is completely not true. The rabbi did not want the trees removed at all. The report blamed the rabbi when in fact it was the airport's decision to remove the trees. The rabbi simply wanted one menorah on display somewhere in the airport.

Update II: And please read Peter F.'s comment about the fact that a lawsuit was never threatened or filed.

Update III: I concede the fact that there was a threat of a lawsuit, but only regarding the display of a menorah, and only after the rabbi asked the airport for weeks to put up a display of a menorah. The rabbi even offered to give the airport a menorah for free. However, I am still correct that the original report, which said that the rabbi demanded that the Christmas trees be taken down, was wrong. The rabbi has been quoted a number of times in other articles and also said in his interview with Bill O'Reilly that he did not want the Christmas trees taken down and removed from that airport. And this is what this whole discussion is actually about. The rabbi received a lot of hate mail because of those inaccurate reports when the removal of the trees was not what he wanted to begin with, and that is what my beef was all about.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Christmas Trees Being Returned to Seattle Airport:

» Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator linked with Christmas Trees Return To SeaTac Airport

» Right Pundits linked with Christmas Returns to Seattle

» Stop The ACLU linked with Christmas Trees Go Back Up At Seattle Airport

Comments (36)

Now if only the Port of Sea... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Now if only the Port of Seattle had the same policy for removing unwanted things in its facility. Like when Sens. Murray and Cant(vote)well walk through our airport.

Thank you for posting the c... (Below threshold)

Thank you for posting the correct story. There didn't seem to be much to back up how the initial story protrayed the rabbi and his request to have a menorah put up as well.

Now, I just hope that others who posted about it will do the same.

"lies, lies, lies --... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"lies, lies, lies -- how appropriate. The conservative blogosphere are the ones lying -- all part of the ongoing attempt to discredit the media which conservatives blame for the republican losses in the 11/7 election. That idiot Rush Limbaugh is leading this parade of lies, with bloggers like Kim happily chiming in - oblivious (or aware but ignoring) the underlying lies they are spreading.

Here is the SeaTac Press Release (empahsis added)

Trees Going Back Up at Sea-Tac Airport

Port of Seattle staff will be reinstalling holiday trees later today at Sea-Tac Airport, after having removed them late last week under threat of a federal lawsuit to be filed by the Central Organization for Jewish Education Lubavitch. Port officials received word from Rabbi Elazar Bogomilsky late this afternoon that his organization will not file a lawsuit at this time over the placement of a menorah at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Given that, the holiday trees will be replaced as quickly as possible.

The media didn't misreport that threat of a lawsuit, as Kim and her fellow liars are maintaining. There is the truth, directly from SeaTac, not filtered through any media outlets. The truth - it took less than a minute to go tothe SeaTac web site and find that press release, Kim.

The media didn't get it wrong, as SeaTac itself indicates in its press release.

How long before Wizbang corrects their error in reporting, Kim? This kind of sloppy, error-ridden, libelous reporting here on Wizbang is getting really old. Don't you folks ever fact-check ANYTHING?

tick...tick...tick...

Pamela at Atlas shrugs is lying in this statement. "Thank the jihad media once again for stirring the pot and putting its leftarded slant (with a healthy dose of Jew hatred) on an otherwise innocuous story. The jihad media claimed the beleagured Rabbi was going to sue the Seattle airport to remove the trees if they didn't display a menorah. Blackmail! Of course the Rabbi could not refute the lies because the story broke on Friday night into Saturday ...... you know the deal. Shabbat."

Slime, nothing but slime from the conservatives these days. So, Kim, are you going to issue a correction or not?

Hey "pucker puss" (lee lee)... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Hey "pucker puss" (lee lee) (#1 "club" member) if you don't like it, stick it. They are back up -RIGHT! Oh the indignation that poor old p'p'(lee lee) suffers when his soap box is overturned. P.S. can you find anymore links or boxed statements-they make you look sooooo intellectual.

jhow66 aka jwho?666,... (Below threshold)

jhow66 aka jwho?666,

I see you still suffer from your depth perception problem.

WooHoo! The trees are retur... (Below threshold)
Old Coot:

WooHoo! The trees are returning. Thanks, Nancy!

Lee,Uh, I live in ... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Lee,

Uh, I live in Seattle, Lee. I can assure you that there was no formal lawsuit filed against the Port despite what the Port's press release says. If anything, the Port assumed a threat when none had formally been made.

According to the Rabbi and his lawyers in numerous radio interviews, they DID send the port legal papers showing precedence and rulings for displaying menorahs in public places. Apparently, the Port in all its infinite wisdom and knee-jerk overreaction, misinterpreted those papers as somehow being a threat to sue and took the trees down post haste. While this quote does not outright state the Port's stupidity, it comes close (from today's Seattle Times): "From what we were made to understand, if we didn't accede to the group's demands," they would file a lawsuit by the next day, Creighton (Port of Seattle director) said. "At the time, it seemed to be a reasonable solution to remove the Christmas trees."

"From what we were made to understand"? From who? The Port's lawyers? Or some upper level dink at the Port? If you don't smell the phrase "stupid assumption" in that sentence somewhere the you're not paying attention.

Frankly, if you want to believe a government employee(s) and their version of a press release (which would be a first for you I'm sure!) over a rabbi, that's your perrogative. Personally, I'd go with the rabbi 99 times out of a 100.

In the end, this has been an embarassment to our beautiful region.

What's interesting is someo... (Below threshold)

What's interesting is someone demanding to put up a religious symbol (a menorah) because the airport had secular Christmas items displayed.

That would be the same as me going to my city hall and demanding that they put up a nativity scene, just because they had Christmas lights displayed.

Just because traditions like Christmas lights, trees, Santa Claus, gift giving... are practiced widely by Christians or people with some Christian exposure in their background, doesn't mean they have any religious meaning.

Hmmm, I don't see Lee posti... (Below threshold)

Hmmm, I don't see Lee posting any retractions for his incorrect posting.

PeterF: From the <a href="h... (Below threshold)
Lee:

PeterF: From the original article Kim quoted several days ago regarding the tree removal (and emphasis added).

He threatened to sue if the menorah wasn't put up, and gave a two-day deadline to remove the trees.

If you are naive enough to believe that SeaTac made up the two-day deadline, then I have a bridge I'd like to show you. If you are naive enough to believe that the rabbi gave them a two-day deadline without implying a lawsuit threat to back it up, I will throw in oceanfront property in Nevada at no extra charge.

An hour has passed an no correction yet from Kim. Let's see how long it takes.

Kim:Here, let me r... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Kim:

Here, let me really stoke the fires of the Port's incompetence.

The rabbi and his friend, Mitchell Stein, had approached the Port about displaying a menorah...drum roll, please....this past October! (This was repeated again and again during their interviews on radio talk shows here in Seattle.)

"Port staff members were first contacted in October by Mitchell Stein, a consultant to the Port for the past five years, who wanted to install a menorah this year. Stein is also affiliated with Chabad."

Further on:

Davis said Port commissioners, however, first heard of the issue on Thursday -- a day before Grad's deadline for filing a lawsuit.

Somebody at the Port is full of crap and failed to do their job when first contacted.


Lee,

I meant to add that the there was certainly the threat of a lawsuit being filed and, in fact, there was a deadline for the Port that the rabbi's lawyer had indicated to the Port AFTER he had already sent them case precedences and rulings. Sorry for not clarifying that previously.

Kim,Lee is correct... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Kim,

Lee is correct. There was the threat of a lawsuit, however no formal one was ever filed.

PeterF wrote: "I can ass... (Below threshold)
Lee:

PeterF wrote: "I can assure you that there was no formal lawsuit filed against the Port despite what the Port's press release says."

Don't twist the facts. What was reported was that there was a "threat of a lawsuit". The port press release does not state that a lawsuit was filed.

From the SeaTac Press Release linked above:

Port of Seattle staff will be reinstalling holiday trees later today at Sea-Tac Airport, after having removed them late last week under threat of a federal lawsuit to be filed by the Central Organization for Jewish Education Lubavitch.

I don't recall reading anywhere that the press reported that a lawsuit had been filed, and you are clearly wrong in saying that the SeaTac press release says that a formal lawsuit was filed.

Hey all,First, sor... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Hey all,

First, sorry for the multiple posts.

Here's the link to today's Seattle Times which contains an an archive of the complete tree scandal.

Just go down the page aways and you'll find the "Related" box which contains the archives to all coverage. Under the "Airport's trees stoking war on Christmas", you'll find a quote from Mr. Stein that says "We thought the Port was going to make the right decision to support diversity and Hanukkah," Stein said. "The lawsuit was only a way to get their attention."

further on:

Grad was set to file a lawsuit Friday morning on behalf of Bogomilsky if the Port did not agree to let him put up the menorah. Grad said he believes that the law is clear regarding Christmas displays in public places -- anyone wanting to put up an alternative display must be accommodated.

The lawsuit was never filed. After the Port had dragged its collective heels for nearly 2 months, the threat of a lawsuit seems reasonable.

Threat of a lawsuit, right.... (Below threshold)

Threat of a lawsuit, right. Not sure anyone got that part wrong. The Rabbi backed off. That's fine, give him credit for that but no need to bury the facts. He did the right thing in the end but he should have never threatened Christmas with lawsuits.

PeterF - I apologize, appar... (Below threshold)
Lee:

PeterF - I apologize, apparently you were posting your correction above while I was writing my reply back to you.

Now that we see Kim is aware of the issues surrounding the accuracy of her report, since she has issued an update -- but still no correction from Kim. Will she now correct her post...?

Lee,No worries, th... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Lee,

No worries, that happens.

Kim,

I apologize for misrepresenting the fact there was not the threat of a lawsuit when in fact there was.

So one person complains and... (Below threshold)
spurwing plover:

So one person complains and the whole airport fall all over themselves to bend to their demands its as bad as that atheist idiot MICHEAL NEWDOW demanding that the whole nation bend to his will and frankly im gald they returned the trees its time that we stop giving intoo the demands of these fools

Let's make something real c... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Let's make something real clear here:

The rabbi and his lawyer did NOT threaten Christmas in any way shape or form. I don't buy that for a second.

No, the issue here is this: The Port of Seattle, whose lawyers seemingly failed deal with the rabbi's request to have a menorah displayed somewhere in the terminal in the weeks prior to this mess, had the idiotic response of deciding to take down the Christmas trees--a threat the rabbi never made and/or wanted. This response is equivalent to a patient complaining of pain in his toe and the doctor removing the entire leg to solve the problem. It's just plain stupid.

(Speaking of stupid, that's two days in a row now I've said misread something and said something stupid in response and now have misrepresented a fact. A banner week so far...yipee.)

What's interesting... (Below threshold)
Lysander:
What's interesting is someone demanding to put up a religious symbol (a menorah) because the airport had secular Christmas items displayed.
versus
Threat of a lawsuit, right. Not sure anyone got that part wrong. The Rabbi backed off. That's fine, give him credit for that but no need to bury the facts. He did the right thing in the end but he should have never threatened Christmas with lawsuits.
(my emphasis)

Which is it? It's either secular (which would preclude it from being called a "Christmas" Tree in the first place - Christmas is a Christian holiday, not a secular day of 'nothing doing') or it's religious. It can't be both, unless somewhere there's pagans, atheists, or other non-Christian religions using "Christmas" Trees - and calling them that.

Since the story broke on Shabbat (Friday after sundown until Saturday after sundown), there was a whole lot of news-time without the possibility of the Rabbi correcting the record - unless it was wanted that the Rabbi should have broke the Sabbath in order to do so.

Christmas is both a religio... (Below threshold)

Christmas is both a religious and secular holiday as practiced. Many of the trappings of lights, trees, Santa, have nothing to do with the religious celebration at the time and a lot of people that are not practicing christians put up lights, trees, snowmen, etc.. You can take these away and take nothing away from the Religious celebration of Christmas by Christians. There's no rule that says it can only be one or the other.

The roots may be due to Christian celebrations, but the commercial and secular components have taken on a life of their own. Due the the goverments making this a federal holiday for everyone, not just Christians also lends to the argument that a good deal of Christmas is secular.

Now the nativity, Jesus, Angels, Star of Bethelem, etc.. are religious symbols and currently someone would have a legitimate complaint if these are place on public grounds or with public monies.

What in the hell is all the... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

What in the hell is all the commotion over a threatened law suit? It's not like he threatened to blow the place up (like the muslisms, make that radical muslisms) would do. Law suits are expensive, even for the one bringing the suit, and by the time it got to court, Christmas would have been long over, and the trees would be land fill. The airport authority should have said " if you want a menorah up, there's a place right over there, go ahead and put one up". To bad they don't teach common sense in law schools!

Christmas is both ... (Below threshold)
Lysander:
Christmas is both a religious and secular holiday as practiced. Many of the trappings of lights, trees, Santa, have nothing to do with the religious celebration at the time and a lot of people that are not practicing Christians put up lights, trees, snowmen, etc.. You can take these away and take nothing away from the Religious celebration of Christmas by Christians. There's no rule that says it can only be one or the other.
Part of the problem is perspective. Or, "what I told you is true - from a certain point of view." The Christmas decorations - when viewed by someone from a Christian background (practicing or not) may be viewed as secular - or secularized - because the decorations aren't central to the faith, and are used by unspecified/non-denominational non-practicing Christians. When viewed by someone who is not from a Christian background - again, practicing or not in whatever faith they may be - the decorations are inextricably linked to the faith and the holiday, even though they may be extraneous to the actual practice of the holiday (a comparison would be the dreidel - while closely linked to Hanukkah, it is not necessary to observe the holiday - but not something that would be seen as truly separate from the holiday, either).
And Lord knows it's a hards... (Below threshold)

And Lord knows it's a hardship and a burden to view displays that make it necessary to admit that people believe something we don't. We should get to go through our days without having to confront belief in any form, as if none of it exists but what we practice at home behind closed doors. /sarcasm

And more seriously... I've made the decision that I will not include "Kwanza" as deserving of the recognition given to religious holidays and observations. What religion is it a part of? What sincere observers find religious expression in it? I've never in my life met a believer in that faith or even know which faith is involved. Wiccans have a faith and observance and I've met them and even know some pagans and, lord help me, Blood for Odin!, I know someone who would claim the Norse gods. I may be a bit put out at the Muslims presently, but I can't fault the sincerity of Ramadan and the fast they undergo. Voodoo seems rather squicky but I accept it is a faith some people follow.

Anything I've ever learned about Kwanza implies that it was created from whole cloth for the express purpose of providing an anti-christmas. An alternative that lacked the taint of whiteness. A reactionary sort of thing, Hannaka is for Jews, Christmas is for Europeans, and Kwanza is for Africans... neveryoumind that Africans can and are Jewish, Christian, Muslim, and all sorts of other things.

Now if someone finds meaning in the observation, that's fabulous. They should do that. It seems like a very nice, uplifting, sort of thing. It emphasizes wonderful principles and is likely, to the extent it adds to rather than replaces other wxpressions of faith, to be an effective influence for the better life we want for people.

Just tell me what religion it's associated with. Which one?

When viewed by someone w... (Below threshold)

When viewed by someone who is not from a Christian background - again, practicing or not in whatever faith they may be - the decorations are inextricably linked to the faith and the holiday, even though they may be extraneous to the actual practice of the holiday

I agree that the perception of many is that these are linked to the religious Christmas, though I think the link is getting weaker. Indeed, some Christians seem to think that these are a necessary part of their religious practice.

I would hate to work for th... (Below threshold)
pennywit:

I would hate to work for this airport as a tree-mover.

--|PW|--

penny:Funny you sh... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

penny:

Funny you should mention that. During one of the interviews on local news here, one of the airport employees was up on a cherrypicker re-attaching the lights and drolly said with a small smile, "Yeah, up here...again." A great way to kick off the news! lol

Of course, if there was any justice in the world, the Port director should've been the one to put all the trees and lights back up. But maybe that's just me... ;-)

I honestly can't blame the ... (Below threshold)
pennywit:

I honestly can't blame the airport for its initial decision to take down the trees. After all, if you start getting everybody bashing you and threatening litigation for not recognizing this, that, or the other holiday, I can see how you might say, "Blech, I don't need this headache."

--|PW|--

Kim, the story was funny, b... (Below threshold)
cat:

Kim, the story was funny, but I did say at the time that something seemed wrong about it. Incidentally, one side effect of this incident is that a whole new phrase has entered the Internet almost overnight. Fox's report claimed the rabbi was from the "Central Organization for Jewish Learning," but a Google search for that name brought up absolutely no results. It's now up to 883.

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&newwindow=1&rls=GGGL%2CGGGL%3A2006-10%2CGGGL%3Aen&q=%22Central+Organization+for+Jewish+Learning&btnG=Search

"[email protected]" shows why he belo... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

"[email protected]" shows why he belongs to the "club".

The Lubavitch are missionar... (Below threshold)
Jeff Y:

The Lubavitch are missionaries to Jews who have lapsed from Judaism or Jewish practices. They are very nice people, but their narrow focus and religious devotion makes them rather naive and sheltered. Also, because the menorah in question was, in fact, symbolic and not adhering to requirements that would make it religiously valid, in his eyes it was a symbol, well, actually, it is a symbol. These kinds of distinctions are crucially important in Judaism, especially to Orthodox practitioners.

If the story had simply been reported accurately, there would have been far less of a fuss, but it was deliberately distorted by the media. I use the word distorted advisedly. Accurate, detailed writing is a major part of my job and it takes deliberate and focused work to create a false and misleading sentence that still maintains a shred of plausible deniability of the "he ran into my fist--I was just practicing" variety to create the major error that Lee keeps on refering to: the "Port of Seattle staff will be reinstalling holiday trees later today at Sea-Tac Airport, after having removed them late last week under threat of a federal lawsuit to be filed by the Central Organization for Jewish Education Lubavitch" sentence. The lawsuit did not threaten the Christmas trees, but only wanted the menorah in, so that makes it a false statement along the lines of, "The Topeka Board of Education reopened its schools today, after having closed them under threat of a federal lawsuit to be filed by Oliver Brown and the Topeka NAACP."

It's all very well talking ... (Below threshold)
cat:

It's all very well talking about media inaccuracy, but just about everyone here lovingly embraces every media inaccuracy that conforms to their own views. One thing I find interesting about this case is how quickly the truth was established and widely disseminated. Had the rabbi been an imam, you'd all still be screaming blue murder and you would never admit you were wrong; never retract a word.

Let's take a superficial look at this case. A rabbi complains that there's no menorah at SeaTac. Nothing is done. He then indicates that legal action is possible. Someone decides that that might open a can of worms - how many other faiths might they be excluding and now have to include - so SeaTac takes the easy way out and removes the trees. Then a local reporter, probably influenced by the "they're banning Christmas" meme that has become so popular, misreports the story. At first, everyone else lazily repeats it, but then people start to look for more details and within days pretty much everyone knows the truth.

Now lets get back to Kim's original British Christmas card story. "They're banning Christmas" is very popular with the lunatic right wing media there too. The Christmas card myth is usually reported alongside many other things that aren't true - like Birmingham council renamed Christmas and called it Winterval. Never happened, but year after year the same lie resurfaces. And Luton council renamed the Christmas lights Luminos (of Harry Potter fame). They didn't, but the truth won't stop the story. Years after these non-events didn't happen, the myths live on. This year, all the media are yelling about a push-poll carried out by a legal company that claims that three out of four employers in Britain have banned Christmas decorations at work. No one knows anyone who knows anyone can cite a single case to back this claim up. Not one single one. And a little digging shows that this same company has been using the same advertising gimmick for the last four years. But the story has now entered the eternal folklore and will never die.

So what's so bad about a couple of days of misunderstanding if the truth is cleared up so quickly? I'm sure that next year, people in America will still be quoting Bill O'Reilly's claim that a school banned red and green clothes. And you'll still be shouting about a non-existent "War against Christmas" just like everyone from the New York Times to the Washington Times, CNN and Fox were shouting about WMD in Iraq in 2002 and 2003.

PostscriptHaving s... (Below threshold)
cat:

Postscript

Having said all that, I would still find the phrase "Happy Holidays" irritating and I'm glad I've never had to hear it. I just wouldn't call it a "war."

Happy Christmas

Re cat: The second most irr... (Below threshold)
Jeff Y:

Re cat: The second most irritating thing about this story has to be that vicious "Someone decides that that might open a can of worms - how many other faiths might they be excluding and now have to include?" line. How many other faiths are there? Perhaps 10, and that's a stretch. And how many have long-established major holidays in December? That would be 2.

As far as that "Had the rabbi been an imam, you'd all still be screaming blue murder and you would never admit you were wrong; never retract a word," claim, well wow! That's a real argument clincher: make up something your opponent didn't do and claim they did. How about this, "Had the rabbi dared entered the airport with his menorah, church/state separists would have murdered him on the spot, and then conducted a repeat of the St/ Bartholomew Day's massacre throughout the Greater Seattle metropolitan area?"

To read the other side's perspecive, read this article: http://www.chabad.org/magazine/article.asp?AID=455712 If your hypothetical Imam was like this guy, the world would be a much happier place, and no one would be screaming anything.

Its quite a shame that this... (Below threshold)
Moniquazie:

Its quite a shame that this incident occured but lets look at the facts we are in America and like it or not this is Americas traditional way of celebrating Christmas. In Isreal I doubt heavily if there are any Christmas trees or celebrating the birth of Jesus going on anywhere. Since Im black Im going to demand a Kwanza celebration and lighting ceremony Im sure that will go over smoothly!

yeah i agree with moniquazi... (Below threshold)

yeah i agree with moniquazie




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy