Greta Van Susteren; “I am inclined to believe him”

And with six short words one can only speculate the fire storm of emails that Greta Van Susteren received over the weekend. By the looks of the GretaWire it looks like someone was busy reading and replying to the ones that could be reprinted. One response is as follows from the GretaWire:

I did not say I believe him. What I said is that I am “inclined to believe him… that this is an ongoing investigation and a new fact could arise which would change all my views.” I don’t believe anyone until this is solved. No one should. I have my eyes wide open but if someone provides me information that is worthy of belief (consistent with known evidence), I am inclined to believe it but I leave the door wide open in case other evidence points at guilt. That is what I said (“get that potato out of your ear!”) Backstabbing arises if I am intellectually dishonest. A criminal investigation is not about picking sides, it is about trying to get the facts. Beth knows that I want to solve this case — but we need to make sure we get the truth, whatever it is. She wants the truth. I want the truth.

We would agree that one must keep an open mind, but that does not mean one forget what has been said to that point in time by a suspect. One first must understand why the suspect wanted to do the interview in the first place before keeping an open mind. What was Joran’s motive? The following comment still puzzles many who have emailed and taken issue with Greta:

I have my eyes wide open but if someone provides me information that is worthy of belief (consistent with known evidence) …

Someone who had admittedly lied to his parents, police, prosecutors, the Holloway’s & Twitty’s, journalists and most likely you Greta; is now suddenly “worthy of belief”? The reasons for the lies make no sense either other than if you were guilty of hiding something. Thus, many are puzzled by what you state as information being consistent with the evidence. What is more likely is having nine months to create a story that plays to what the known evidence is. Why else would there be lies all a long the way and know all of a sudden the truth?
Read more

Joran Van der Sloot, ‘On the Record’, Part III

Joran Van der Sloot continues his latest version of events with Greta Van Susteren interview Part III.

Joran makes the following comment, which interestingly enough is the exact same line that Attorney Joe Tacopina, Joran’s civil case lawyer has made on TV.

If this would have happened in the United States, no one would have been arrested and no one — no one — they wouldn’t have even been able to arrest someone in this case. There’s absolutely not any — any evidence of anything, not of any foul play, not of anything like that. There’s not any evidence to show that she’s alive. There’s not evidence to show that something happened to her.

The same comment will be made to Joran as it was to Joe T. You were not in the United States Joran and trust me your connections in Aruba would have done you no good in the US if you had ever done the same.

Your property would have been searched and both the Kalpoes and you would have been considered suspects within the first 24 hours. Forensic evidence would have been taken and items would have been seized immediately.

You can thank you lucky stars you were not in the United States. None of this investigative nonsense and preferential treatment would have existed.

The rest of the Greta Van Susteren transcripts, Part III

UNC Grad, Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar, in Court on Hit & Run

Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar in court today after running down nine people on campus to avenge the treatment of Muslims. His comment was,

“thankful for the opportunity to spread the will of Allah.”
(FOX News)

I guess Mohammed Reza Taheri-azar didn’t get the memo that Islam was a religion of peace, at least that’s what we are told.

Authorities Release 911 Call Made By Suspect In UNC Hit-And-Run

In the call, he tells the 911 operator that the police could go and pick him up at the corner of Hillview and Plant roads, where he is waiting outside the vehicle.

“You can come arrest me,” Taheri-azar said.
(WRAL)

US Supreme Court Upholds Campus Military Recruiting

What exactly did anyone think that would happen when a college or university accepts federal money? Hardly a difficult decision when colleges and universities accept approximately $35 billion a year.

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously Monday that colleges that accept federal money must allow military recruiters on campus, despite university objections to the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy on gays.

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote:

“A military recruiter’s mere presence on campus does not violate a law school’s right to associate, regardless of how repugnant the law school considers the recruiter’s message”.
(AP)

Washington Post: Court Upholds Campus Military Recruiting

Others covering story:
SCOTUS, Court upholds “Solomon Amendment”
Ace of Spades, A Victory for the U.S. Military

Hollywood’s Oscar ratings down. What a Shock for the Academy Awards?

Weak television ratings for last nights Academy Awards. Who could not have see that coming? No one had seen the movies that we nominated for best “motion picture”. Thus, why would any one watch an awards show about movies no one knew about, better yet, no one cared about.
(Reuters)

Note to Jon Stewart: Washington Post’s Tom Shales urging him to “keep your ‘Daily’ job.”