Elder of Ziyon asks a simple question. How can headline writers lie so blatantly?! I'm going to post on this myself, I think...
Glenn Reynolds (of Instapundit fame) has a very good article in the Wall Street Journal on why the White House should listen to blogs a bit more, using the ports story as an example.
Fox has a very sad story: A young rape victim is in a very difficult situation.
A 20-year-old woman could face contempt-of-court charges if she doesn't answer defense attorneys' questions about a videotape of her alleged rape. The Naperville woman refused to view or comment on the videotape during testimony Tuesday at the trial of 20-year-old Adrian Missbrenner. Prosecutors say Missbrenner and others videotaped themselves having sex with the then-16-year-old girl during a party at the Missbrenner family's suburban Burr Ridge home. Cook County Judge Kerry Kennedy on Tuesday ordered the woman to answer questions on the witness stand or face contempt charges. The judge gave her until Wednesday morning to rethink her decision. Missbrenner's defense attorneys quickly asked for the case to be dismissed. But the judge did not rule on the motion Tuesday.It's hard: Obviously one can understand why she wouldn't want to watch the video, but if it's integral to the case, it makes sense that she be required to testify as to certain issues that may be on the video. Ugh.
UPDATE: (Thanks, Robbie) The judge changed his mind. She will not have to view the tape.