Leading Off (12/7/15)

Tiny Crowd Turns Out To Support Small-Minded Irving Mayor. It could be worse. Irving could still have the Cowboys.

Police Arrest Two Suspects In Early Morning Robbery At Gunpoint In Oak Lawn. It’s been a rough few months in the Oak Lawn area, with at least a dozen unsolved burglaries and attacks, so this was a bit of good news. The suspects haven’t been tied to any of the previous crimes, at least for now, and police plan to keep up additional patrols. Could be worse. Oak Lawn could get annexed by Irving.

Two More Earthquakes Over the Weekend. A 2.1 on Saturday and a 2.8 on Sunday. Guess where? Come on. Guess. I’ll give you a hint. It rhymes with “Irving.”

Wes Matthews Ties Mavs Record With 10 3-Pointers. His big second half — he made eight 3s as part of his 28 points in the third and fourth quarters — fueled the team’s win against the Wizards. You know where they struggle with their outside shots? Irving.

Newsletter

Get a weekly recap in your inbox every Sunday of our best stories from the week plus a primer for the days ahead.

Find It

Search our directories for...

Dining

Dining

Bars

Bars

Events

Events

Attractions

Attractions

View All

View All

Comments

  • LewP

    I guess it’s “Hate Irving Day” at D Magazine.

  • LewP

    Folks, these Rattlesnakes are in need of a home. They’re refugees from the Hill country pushed out by snake hunting, flooding and feral hogs. Now, we think most of these are good snakes and won’t bite you, but we are sure some of these will bite you without provocation. We can’t tell you which of snakes in the bunch are the ones that will kill you because they all came in together and we can’t tell which is which ! In fact, we found elsewhere some are the biting ones who were trained to seek out anyone and bite, hiding among the good ones. But, our federal government has promised to figure it out, so don’t worry.
    So who wants to give all these snakes a good home? Yeah…its kinda like that.

    • @zaccrain

      Actually it’s not like that at all. But I can count on you to try again several dozen more times, so great.

      • LewP

        Oh, it’s exactly like that, but leave it to you to try and force your opinion on the general public via D Magazine.

        • @zaccrain

          Did you just start reading our blog?

          • LewP

            Now I guess you are going to try intimidation to enforce your ideas and views….same old D Magazine

          • @zaccrain

            Intimidation? Hardly. You can post as much dumb stuff on here as you want. We’re not going to run out of space.

          • EricCeleste

            Reminds me …

          • RAB

            Dude, come on. The same can be said for the majority-minority in San Antonio and Dallas. It’s whether you “feel” oppressed.

          • billmarvel

            Apprently, Lewp, your knowledge of rattlesnakes is no clearer than your knowledge of other folks and their religions.

        • A. B.

          Did the snakes go through years of background checks, interviews or fingerprinting? If so, I’d love to hear all about it.

          • LewP

            I don’t know if the snakes did, but I understand the woman terrorist did that was responsible for what? 14 dead and 20 injured?. Looks like she was able to “beat the system.” Is that the point you are trying to make?

          • John Franklin Guild

            And she was not a refugee and did not go through the refugee process, which is the most difficult way to get in the country. Only the dumbest of terrorists would try to use the refugee process to come to this country.

          • A. B.

            Wrong. She came in on a K1 (fiancee/spouse) visa, not a refugee visa. A K1 visa is much easier to get as you are being sponsored by a US citizen. Not nearly as much investigation and the process moves along much more quickly.

          • A. B.

            A tourist, work or fiancee/spouse visa requires a lot less vetting than a refugee visa.

    • DF Chris Chris

      Are you going to use that weird analogy when Joseph and pregnant Mary come to your house? Excuse me, I mean Bubba Joe and Mary Sue from the Hill Country?

      • LewP

        I don’t think Joseph and Mary were carrying assault rifles when they went to the manger. I mean, I guess Bubba Joe and Mary were Jewish besides.

        • DF Chris Chris

          If only Bethlehem had Open Carry back then, am I right?

          • LewP

            I don’t guess they had a reason for that then, am I right?

          • @zaccrain

            I mean, I’m sure at least one of the apostles might have liked to have a gun on them when Pontius Pilate was bringing the heat.

    • John Franklin Guild

      Yes, because an human life in Middle East = Texas rattle snake life. The simple fact that you view them as equivalent is how I know you’re a bigot. I’ll see your picture of rattle snakes and raise you some random pictures of the people we are actually talking about. http://www.google.com/images?q=Syrian+Refugee

      • LewP

        OK then, excuse me.. Let’s let thousands of refugees in the country then, and lets have many more terrorists come in…I’m sorry, my mistake. I thought most people wanted to get rid of terror in this country. My bad.

        • John Franklin Guild

          No doubt. This man clearly has hate for America in his heart, which undoubtedly would increase dramatically if we provided him and his child refuge from the war. Because God doesn’t love him, so why should we, amiright?

        • John Franklin Guild

          Let me ask you this, because this really gets down to the issue. If we save a 100,000 Syrian refugees’ lives by bringing 50,000 of them here and being a positive example to the word which is dealing much more directly with the cost of this (there are more than 2,000,000 in one country that is a fraction of our size and wealth), and if in so doing we let in one or two very stupid terrorists in (they could get in some other way much more easily, quickly, and with far less risk, but hey, who knows, right?) and we have a Paris attack as a result, do you think it is consistent with our Country’s place in the world to say that price was too high, or is that the cost of being the world’s leader? Because if we are no longer willing to take on risks because it is the right and moral thing to do for humanities sake, we need to find something to replace “land of the brave.”

        • EricCeleste

          Glad THAT is cleared up.

        • A. B.

          Guess what. Many thousands of refugees have been allowed into the US over several decades. Not one has ever committed an act of terrorism.

          • Happy Bennett

            Till now.

          • A. B.

            I will not till now as I don’t own a tiller. As for refugee terrorists, it still hasn’t happened.

          • Happy Bennett

            Actually, the Boston bomber family WERE refugees from war torn Chechnya seeking political and religious asylum. That worked out well, didn’t it? Intelligence sharing with the Russians indicated that they were suspicious–a small factor completely ignored by the Janet Napolitano homeland security crowd….Also for historical purists bombing anarchists Sacco and Vanzetti were turn of the (20th)Century refugees from Italy and known followers of Italian anarchist Luigi Galleani..

          • A. B.

            Wrong. Tsarnaevs came in on a tourist visa, then applied for asylum after they were already here. They were not on a refugee visa.

          • Happy Bennett

            They were refugees applying for asylum–don’t be cute.

          • A. B.
          • A. B.
    • John Franklin Guild

      Hey, here’s one of the refugees who didn’t make it. I guess if he did, you’d take him out with a 20 gauge if you saw him given that you think the treatment of a 3-year-old boy from Syria has the same value/risk proposition as a rattle snake.

      • Happy Bennett

        About 14 of our own American citizens didn’t make it in San Bernardino last week. But you shouldn’t let your propaganda photo get in the way of reality this week.

        • John Franklin Guild

          And the San Bernardino shooting was a tragedy that has nothing to do with Syrian refugees, other than the fact that Syrian refugees are also victims of the same people who would do us harm. Syrian refugees are running AWAY from the same people who would attack us. They are just suffering on a scale we can’t comprehend. Dooming a few million Syrians to suffer in inhumane conditions in refugee camps in Turkey and Lebanon, many of those to die of hunger and disease, won’t bring any of the people in San Bernardino back. But helping might just show the world that we are still a brave and compassionate people, that we are the light and ISIL is the darkness. More importantly, Syrian refugees are people, and anyone who supports your view of refugees must look at this child and say I’d rather this happens to 100,000 other innocent children than risk having one more bad person come to the U.S. and do us harm (as though we’d notice through our own bad people).

          • Happy Bennett

            It is difficult to care when the idea of gratitude,or even the decency not to inflict suffering or deadly force upon one’s host country evidently–given recent events- no longer exists in the immigrant population.

  • Happy Bennett

    D magazine and DMN have engaged in a sickening,maniacal non stop smear campaign against this woman the citizens of Irving, the ISD and the Irving police department. I personally hope she sues the H#ll out of them.

    • @zaccrain

      Man, me too.

    • @zaccrain

      Why do you hate commas so much? Sometimes you crowd them, using no spaces. Other times, you don’t use them at all. Why do you hate commas???

      • Bethany

        There are a finite number of commas for each day, and this guy is generously allowing the rest of us to use them.

      • Happy Bennett

        Do commas require your special propagandistic protection? Perhaps I’m just an anti-comma bigot, who loathes commas in any setting (sarc).

    • Joe Bob

      She is a public figure and the comments have all been about her actions as a public figure. Exactly what law would give her a forum to “sue the hell out of em?”

      • A. B.

        Shariah law??

        • Joe Bob

          haha! Good one!

        • VMA

          He shoots, he scores.

        • Happy Bennett

          You do understand that women’s rights are limited under Sharia law ….Sadly some commenters here might be subject to being ejected from rooftops in countries practicing Sharia law.

      • Happy Bennett

        Stalking, intimidation, libel…….What “actions ” in her role as a mayor entitle you big brave boys to call her sexually nasty names, or a bigot, idiot etc? You didn’t like that she appears in public on behalf of her constituents? Tough.

        • @zaccrain

          Who called her a sexually nasty name? Link please.

        • Joe Bob

          She is a public figure, so, the standard for libel cases is that actual malice must be proved, which is virtually impossible to prove in any case. The other two are not legal causes of action. It comes with the territory of being a public figure. She’s obviously not concerned about it, so it’s funny that some feel the need to take up for her.

    • jfpo

      Your mayor is a horrible human being. She’s getting off light in the media.

  • tested123

    It’s pretty sad that when 40 people show up to support a position the liberal writers at D Magazine like it is reported as “people rally for/against…” instead of highlighting how many people showed up. Yet, when a group shows up to support a position the liberal writers at D don’t like, the number of people is all they can talk about. Personally, I don’t know that most rallies are newsworthy to begin with. But if you’re going to report on them, you should focus on what they said first, not how many people showed up. By the same token, if a rally attracts 50,000 people – that is newsworthy to perhaps put in the headline, but should not be the sole focus of the story.

    • @zaccrain

      OK, you’re right. Here you go:

      Over the weekend, a group rallied around Mayor Beth Van Duyne for speaking out against something that was never going to happen in the first place, a stance she took solely to prey on people’s fears to cravenly score political points and fuel a speaking tour. She obviously is planning on either a talking-head #TCOT gig or a run for statewide office, but hey, who cares if Irving is associated with Islamaphobia in the process? The people who showed up don’t seem to mind. Also, all they said was stuff they read on a Donald Trump hat.

      Happy?

  • JamieT

    People, please…Zac is the GEICO gecko of FrontBurner click bait. It’s what he does. Vacuous moral posturing works as well as doggy names.

    What I find curious and a bit problematic are the constant reassurances by Zac and the White Boys of D (my favorite new band name) that all our North Texas Muslims are by definition the tame and harmless kind.

    Really?

    If I were an Irving Muslim I do believe I might be just a little bit insulted that I can automatically and condescendingly be discounted as any sort of threat at all by a crew of white infidel magazine writers in the big city.

    • @zaccrain

      Huh.

    • Bethany

      Do you actually know any Muslims that live in Irving?

    • John Franklin Guild

      “Zac is the GEICO gecko of FrontBurner click bait.” You done clicked, right?

      “What I find curious and a bit problematic are the constant reassurances by Zac and the White Boys of D (my favorite new band name) that all our North Texas Muslims are by definition the tame and harmless kind.” Where have they said such a thing? I can’t speak for them, but I think that North Texas Muslims are just as good/bad as any other group of people on the whole. Lots of good, some bad, some scary.

      • Happy Bennett

        But Lew above is out of line in expressing his sentiment about “scary” in his own way? How big of you.

        • John Franklin Guild

          1) Lew said the lives of millions of human beings are no more valuable than the lives of rattle snakes. You apparently agree. That makes you very small.

          2) “Scary” is subjective and, for most people, includes a small percentage of almost every demographic in the world. And Lew’s way of expressing his sentiment about scary is bigoted and ignorant because it assumes essentially no value for human lives that look different from him and is based on his lack of understanding of the refugee process.

    • Happy Bennett

      Candidates for the Sharia roof top flight academy.

      • @zaccrain

        Does all of this sound good when you type it? I’m just trying to reverse engineer where it turns into nonsense. May be our CMS.

        • Happy Bennett

          Does it satisfy some of your primitive female bashing/abusing urges to constantly criticize and belittle a solitary female (perhaps more conservative than you can tolerate) mayor in the metroplex on such flimsy pretexts? Perhaps serious pursuits are beyond your limited intellectual range.

          • @zaccrain

            Her being a woman has nothing to do with it, and the pretexts are certainly not flimsy.

          • Happy Bennett

            When you get off of “comma patrol” you might take the time to look up the meaning of “pretext”.

  • JamieT

    So, how did D(allas) Magazine’s FrontBurner blog score off of Irving’s Muslims today?

    Sixty-four comments on Zac’s post alone, counting Zac’s 20% give or take comments to his own post, of course (let’s call those assists), plus several more on Glenn Hunter’s previous post.

    Well played!

    Remotely and abstractly protecting Irving’s Muslims from the alleged predations of their mayor must certainly count as a proven blog hit parade now, sure to be repeated, I would think. And only the minutest of keystroke time in cost.

    And, just to be sure everyone knows that I, too, am totally down with this sort of self-admiring, empty moral posturing,

    #bringbackourgirls

    There. That should do it!

  • JamieT

    BTW, those who scoff and say Sharia law cannot possibly come to political jurisdictions with a large enough population of Muslims really need to explain how illegal immigrant-serving sanctuary cities can possibly exist at all.

    Because, according to the hypothesis that there is an existing law of the land preventing it, there could be no such thing as a sanctuary city. As we all know, federal immigration law inexorably smashes any attempt to contravene it – except when it doesn’t.

    The key to both, of course, is political expediency. When a large enough cohort of voters wants something, politicians will first sell their mothers, then use the proceeds to see that those demanding a contravention of the existing laws get as much of it as possible to ensure election. It doesn’t really matter if it is families of illegal immigrants, conservative Muslims wanting Sharia, or marijuana smokers, political expediency will gently shove existing, ostensibly sacrosanct law aside.

    If the political jurisdiction is populated more with liberal Muslims disdaining Sharia, the chances are nil. If that jurisdiction is under the control of armed ISIS, the chances are, naturally, a certainty, and for everyone, not just Muslims. Somewhere along that spectrum of Muslim interest in Sharia as the reigning code of justice Sharia will become the common choice of the Muslim constituency, and politicians wanting to win elections will satisfy that desire however they must. Citing a need to prioritize resources is always a good one.

    Again, as with illegal immigration, marijuana smoking, or anything else, it all simply depends on the density of the population desiring the political commodity in question and the political will or willful expediency of the politician in a position to satisfy those desires.

    • Mavdog

      Your analogy is a fallacy.

      The supposition that a large enough community of any type of population can impose a legal theocracy in the US if that jurisdiction were “under the control of an armed” force entails the absence of government as we know it in favor of another.

      The existence of “sanctuary cities” is a byproduct of the federal jurisdiction on immigration, and the local authority taking the position their role in immigration is to not address the issue.

      The first is the removal of the Constitution and its mandates, the second is a literal application of the Constitution and its mandates.

      As for the uber cynical description of “politicians will first sell their mothers”, while there are plenty of examples of a politician who sacrifices their morals in pursuit of demagoguery (the blog’s subject a prime example), my faith in the American politicos understanding there are boundaries to their recklessness says they won’t “sell their mothers”. We’ll just have to disagree on the strength of our system.

      • Happy Bennett

        Whew what bilge–good to know that your position is the US Constitution and its mandates (which our elected leaders are sworn to uphold) needs to be “removed “–and all this coming from a talking white dog no less! (LMAO).

        • Mavdog

          Happy Bennett :”good to know that your position is the US Constitution and its mandates (which our elected leaders are sworn to uphold) needs to be “removed”

          wow, you sure understand that post I wrote!
          whoosh….right over your head.
          thanks for (not) contributing…..

          • Happy Bennett

            Perhaps, then you are an unusually bad communicator or perhaps you find yourself in the position of modifying your initial observations.

          • Mavdog

            nope, the problem is totally on your end.
            good luck with that.

          • Happy Bennett

            As usual you have it backwards or have communicated it poorly.

      • JamieT

        “The supposition that a large enough community of any type of population can impose a legal theocracy in the US if that jurisdiction were “under the control of an armed” force entails the absence of government as we know it in favor of another.”

        As usual, Mavdog, you are arguing with your own straw men.

        The claim I actually advanced is that a large enough population of Muslims so inclined can impose Sharia law on its members in lieu of and in contravention of existing U.S. law if, as in the case of illegal immigrant sanctuary cities, those otherwise charged with legally preventing it simply acquiesce to the wishes of that community out of political expediency, such political expediency over and against clear and indisputable law to the contrary being the very reason sanctuary cities cannot legally exist but yet, in fact, do in practice.

        Your complaint should have been, “Well, if that’s the case, what good would any anti-Sharia law statute do?”, and the answer is, maybe nothing, but at least it would provide another legal obstacle to the sort of meltdown of clear and indisputable existing legal structures we are currently witnessing with sanctuary cities, ignoring federal anti-marijuana laws, etc.

        • Mavdog

          No Jamie, I am not “arguing” anything.

          Sanctuary cities exist due to the decision by the local government that their police force will not enforce federal law, and it is up to the federal government to enact that enforcement. A sanctuary city does not remove the law, it does not change the law, it does not ‘”acquiesce” at all. ICE can and has enforced the law in sanctuary cities.
          If sanctuary cities “cannot legally exist” a court would find them in violation of the Law and order a change. They do exist s the Courts have repeatedly ruled that immigration is a federal issue, not a local issue, enabling the cities to do as they have.

          Likewise, if any area is “under the control of armed ISIS” any and all law not enacted by ISIS would be irrelevant.