Posted on 12/21/2005 2:06:09 PM PST by Zionist Conspirator
Who's been charged with perjury?
I see the dorks at the UnDiscovery Institute are in full-blown damage-control mode over this decision. Can't let those donations dry up just because a Bush appointed Republican judge exposed the lies, mendacity, and perjury of the Dover School Board scoundrels who were ramming ID into the science class, to say nothing of exposing ID itself for the non-scientific sham it is.
Which is not exactly a job history a libertarian should admire. He sounds like a friend of Ridge's.
What part of the ruling did you not understand?
Read the above post. He sounds like a political hack. He ran the Pa. Liquor Control Board under Ridge.
Does the article disclose that it's author, David Klinghoffer, is a Senior Fellow at the Discovery Institute?
My guess is that they are sitting it out. Especially the feministas, who probably dont like intelligent design any better than neo-Darwinism. Both are anathema to their fairy tale that sex roles are socially constructed.
You are expecting the proID Klinghoffer to testify consisnetly?
Jones was appointed by G W Bush in 2002. Deal.
I'm (shocked)2
Are you invoking the Clinton defense?
Funny you should ask; the ORIGINAL article does so mention at the very end of the article, but the poster curiously FAILED TO INCLUDE THAT PORTION OF THE ARTICLE when he posted it here in FR. FWIW, that's the second time I've seen an op-ed piece authored by a UN-Discovery Insititute hack posted to FR with the author's affiliation left off. I can only assume they are ashamed of UN-Discovery Institute folks, as they should be.
Just a minor sin of omission. Anyway, now the full situation is known. This article is a propaganda piece from the Discovery Institute, the "think" tank that promotes ID. Nothing new here, folks.
Evidently the author is even more dishonest than I'd thought.
Casey Luskin got dizzy and fell down after trying to spin this ruling. So they had to send in Klinghoffer from the bench.
OK, so the accusation of dishonesty needs to be somewhat redirected (but only somewhat -- an honest person would have announced so relevant an affiliation up front).
Nonsense. Darwinian evolution makes no assertion, positive or negative, about the possibility that there is a supernatural reality. It simply declines to rely on that notion (as it must, to remain within the purview of science).
By this silly line of reasoning, a policeman who gives you a ticket for driving down the left side of the road in Manchester, New Hampshire is denying the possibility that there is such a place as Manchester, England (where driving down the left side of the road is perfectly acceptable).
In all likelihood, the Discovery Institute had a few of these spin pieces written up and ready to go, anticipating that they would lose the case in Dover. Good spinning. Great lying. Typical creationists. As I said, nothing new here, folks.
Clinton was charged with perjury. Who has been charged in this case?
I'm not aware of any actual charges, yet. However, as the learned judge said in his opinion:
Finally, although Buckingham, Bonsell, and other defense witnesses denied the reports in the news media and contradicted the great weight of the evidence about what transpired at the June 2004 Board meetings, the record reflects that these witnesses either testified inconsistently, or lied outright under oath on several occasions, and are accordingly not credible on these points. [page 105]We don't yet know if any official charges will be brought.and
As we will discuss in more detail below, the inescapable truth is that both Bonsell and Buckingham lied at their January 3, 2005 depositions about their knowledge of the source of the donation for Pandas, which likely contributed to Plaintiffs’ election not to seek a temporary restraining order at that time based upon a conflicting and incomplete factual record. This mendacity was a clear and deliberate attempt to hide the source of the donations by the Board President and the Chair of the Curriculum Committee to further ensure that Dover students received a creationist alternative to Darwin’s theory of evolution. We are accordingly presented with further compelling evidence that Bonsell and Buckingham sought to conceal the blatantly religious purpose behind the ID Policy. [page 115]
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.