Sanitized for WHOSE protection?

When I first came across a story blurb on Yahoo that came from the AP I was left more curious than informed.

Man accused of selling daughter for cash, beer

GREENFIELD, Calif. – Police have arrested a Greenfield man for allegedly arranging to sell his 14-year-old daughter into marriage in exchange for $16,000, 100 cases of beer and several cases of meat.

...
Police say arranged marriages involving underage girls have become a problem in this small Central Coast farming community.

I was left more curious than informed since nothing in the story gave a clue why a small town farming community might suddenly sprout a rash of using underage daughters as an ATM.

What's interesting is the timestamp for the AP Story: Mon Jan 12, 9:03 pm ET

So I started looking for more stories. It took me a tremendous effort consisting of opening a new browser window, typing in a single search phrase and then clicking on the first couple of resulting links. Too much effort for any reporter to be expected to do.

So, what did I find? I'm beginning to get an inkling based upon another story.

Marcelino de Jesus Martinez was arrested Sunday on suspicion of accepting the offer of money, beer and meat to place his daughter with Margarito de Jesus Galindo, police said.

Police became aware of the transaction after Martinez asked police to return his daughter. The father said the girl had run away, but police came to believe that he wanted her back because her suitor hadn't paid up, Grebmeirer said.

"We were working on this one kind of backward. We hear about these things all the time, but they are kind of tough to investigate or prove," Grebmeier said today.

A different story turned up the photo I posted without giving the names of the the pimping pappa or the baby-raping buyer.

The more detailed report was time stamped: Posted: 01/12/2009 10:38:41 AM PST

Many, many hours BEFORE the AP story.

The story that had the photo was time stamped: 1/12/09 at 7:20 PM. No time zone was indicated but I think it's safe to say Pacific.

I could expect the photo to be missing from the AP story, but the names of the buyer and seller?

WHY?

These names are of adults charged with crimes. That's public record. They are not the victim.

Who is being protected by hiding this information? Why would a farming community suddenly sprout a certain type of crime?

Well, maybe because of who moved in. Without being legal. Someone doing here what they were doin' back in the old country. Why bother to follow the laws and values of a nation you are invading?

We won't know from these stories if the perpetratin' pappa or the cradle-robbin' Romeo are legal. We probably won't be told the truth as this story takes place in California where they protect illegal aliens better than the California Condor.

An outrage

Does anyone out there still deny that the ACLU isn't standing up for EVERYONE?

Here's a perfect example of someone's First Amendment rights being trampled and there's not one ACLU zombie in sight.

A Marine veteran whose anti-terrorist and anti-Islam vehicle decals hindered him in visiting the grave of his fallen son at Arlington National Cemetery has filed a federal lawsuit challenging the military order which rebuked his display of the decals.

Jesse Nieto, a 25-year Marine veteran, served two combat tours in Vietnam. His youngest son, Marc, was one of the seventeen sailors killed in the terrorist bombing of the U.S.S. Cole in October of 2000.

Since 1994 Nieto has been a civilian employee at the Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. In 2001 he began displaying various decals on his vehicle expressing sentiments such as “Remember the Cole, 12 Oct 2000,” “Islam=Terrorism” and “We Died, They Rejoiced.”

On July 31, 2008, two military police officers ticketed Nieto for displaying “offensive material.”

After Nieto refused to remove all allegedly offending decals from his vehicle, the Base Magistrate issued a written order ordering Nieto to remove his vehicle from the base until all decals were removed. The order banned his vehicle from all other federal installations, and reportedly prevented him from driving onto the grounds of Arlington National Cemetery.

The Ann Arbor-based Thomas More Law Center filed a federal civil rights lawsuit this week on Nieto’s behalf against the Camp Lejeune Commanding Officer and the Base Magistrate in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina. The lawsuit claims that the military’s ban on Nieto’s vehicle decals violates his constitutional rights to freedom of speech and the equal protection of the law.

“The banning of these decals is political correctness run amuck in the military,” charged Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center. “Our troops are being killed by Islamic terrorists, 9/11 was caused by Islamic terrorists, these terrorists want to destroy America, the Islamic countries persecute Christians, and now the military is victimizing a father whose son was killed by Islamic terrorists while serving our nation.”

Liberals are fond of lying about the ACLU claiming it's for EVERYONE. They can't name a single example, however, of the ACLU fighting for the 2nd Amendment. Too bad we can't get an ACLU lawyer to sue the ACLU for false advertising. They need to correct the name of the organization. American CERTAIN Liberties Union would be truthful.

It is shameful, though, that ANY veteran would be ticketed for practicing his freedom of speech. That the veteran's freedom of speech is underscored by the loss of his son and the message being suppressed is the truth of who killed that son is beyond shameful.