By RALPH PETERS

April 28, 2006 — IF a street-corner thug knowingly receives stolen goods for profit, he goes to jail. If a well-educated, privileged journalist profits from receiving classified information – stolen from our government – he or she gets a prize.

Is something wrong here?

Media outlets, including the generally responsible Washington Post, have had fits over a few retired generals’ unclassified criticism of the Secretary of Defense, while simultaneously insisting on their own right to receive and publish our nation’s wartime secrets – and to shield the identities of unethical bureaucrats who betray our nation’s trust.

Since the Vietnam era, reporters have convinced themselves that they are the real heroes in any story. The archways above our journalism faculties soon may sport the maxim: “The Press can do no wrong.”

But the press can do wrong. And it does it with gusto. Let me tell you what the illegal receipt and exploitation of our nation’s secrets used to be called: Espionage. Spying. Yet today’s “real” spies cause less harm to our national security than self-righteous journalists do.

A NATION at war must keep secrets. The media can’t plead that classified documents just fell into their hands, obligating them to publish our secrets out of a noble respect for truth. That’s bull, and every journalist knows it. Could a punk down on the block claim that, since he was offered a gun, he was obligated to aim it and pull the trigger?

Many in the media not only want to re-write election results and change national policies – they’ve been re-writing history, too. On the entertainment-and-propaganda side, George Clooney produced a gorgeous, seductive and whoppingly dishonest film about journalism last year, “Good Night, and Good Luck.”

Deftly re-arranging the fall of Sen. Joseph McCarthy – by slighting the fact that only the Department of the Army had the guts to stand up to Tailgunner Joe at the height of his powers (a civilian lawyer for the Army asked the famous question, “Senator, have you no shame?”) – the film leads the viewer to believe that a lone journalist, Edward R. Murrow, broke the senator’s evil spell.

Of course, crediting the Army with the courage to defend the Constitution would have played havoc with the left-wing view of civil-military relations. But the greater omission had to do with Murrow’s background. He made his bones with courageous radio coverage of the London Blitz. And he didn’t feel compelled to tell the Nazi side of the story and help us feel Hitler’s pain.

Edward R. Murrow kept secrets. Lots of them. He wanted the Allies to win. He even respected those in uniform. So he – and other journalists – remained silent about the landing exercise that went tragically awry at Slapton Sands, and about many another bad-for-morale event that might’ve made a hot headline. He kept D-Day-related secrets, too.

Do even our most self-adoring journalists really think that Edward R. Murrow would have published secret documents about prisons for senior Nazis during wartime?

NONE of us wants our media to engage in propaganda. We’d just like them to refrain from harming our country for selfish ends.

Which brings us to the Pulitzer-Prize-winning (and still not confirmed) story that claimed to reveal secret prisons holding a few high-ranking terrorists in Eastern Europe: If such facilities existed, what harm did they do to our country or the world? On the other hand, proclaiming their existence played into the hands of terrorists and America-haters.

That Pulitzer Prize wasn’t really for journalism. It was a political statement. No one’s going to get a journalism award for reporting on the War on Terror’s successes or progress in Iraq. Only left-wing children get a prize.

AFTER laboring in the intelligence vineyards for over two decades, I can assure you of a few things: First, there are no super-top-secret, black-helicopter, kidnap-American-Idol-judges conspiracies hidden since 1776. Second, there are legitimate secrets that must be protected – usually because revealing them would tip our collection methods or operational techniques to our country’s mortal enemies (as the secret-prisons story did).

I can assure you of a third thing, too: If an intelligence professional saw a genuine threat to the Constitution or to the rights of his or her fellow citizens, he or she would step forward – and be justified in doing so.

But pique over your presidential candidate’s defeat or mere disagreement with a policy does not justify anyone – intelligence professional or political appointee – in passing classified information to a party not authorized to receive it.

This applies to White House staffers, too, no matter how senior. The law should take its course, in every case, from the briefing room to the newsroom. The Washington culture of leaks is a bipartisan disgrace – and a real-and-present danger to our security.

WE face savage enemies who obey no laws, honor no international conventions, treaties or compacts, and who believe they do the will of a vengeful god. Under the circumstances, we need to be able to keep an occasional secret.

So I would ask three questions of those journalists chasing prizes by printing our wartime secrets:

* Can you honestly claim to have done our nation any good?

* Did you weigh the harm your act might cause, including the loss of American lives?

* Is the honorable patriotism of Edward R. Murrow truly dead in American journalism?

If you draw a government (or contractor) paycheck and willfully compromise classified material, you should go to jail. If you are a journalist in receipt of classified information and you publish it to the benefit of our enemies, you should go to jail (you may, however, still accept your journalism prize, as long as the trophy has no sharp edges). And consider yourself fortunate: The penalty for treason used to be death.

When a journalist is given classified information, his or her first call shouldn’t be to an editor. It should be to the FBI.

By Robert Farrow

“The earth is a cradle of reason, but one cannot live in a cradle for ever.” Konstantin Tsiolkovsky

Around 600 Years ago a nation was on it’s path to dominate the world. It was called the Ming Dynasty. In almost every category it’s navy was superior to the nations of the West. Had the past been a bit different, the East might have been the power center of the world, enveloping the globe with it’s religion and it’s culture. The Emperor of the Mings, Yun Lo, enjoyed a fleet of over two hundred ships, all much larger then those of the West, and encouraged great voyages of exploration. The Mings quickly discovered Africa and would have soon sailed around it to make contact with Europe when the exploration money dried up. Political opponents of Lo decided the money would be better spent on irrigation projects, and the fleet was abandoned. A few years later, the Portugese rounded Africa, and with no one in their way, they kept going. One hundred years later the Portugese sized a small Chinese island which began the domination of China by the West. Soon after that the dominion of the waters passed to the British, who built an empire from which the Sun never set until the 20th century.

Like Seafaring, spacefaring has very marginal returns in early voyages. They were also very costly, in material as well as lives. Even the voyage duration are similar- trips to Mars is about as long as Magellan’s first voyage around the world. It is the same for us as well. In the beginning, most of the early American settlements were failures, a drain on the mother country’s resources more then anything else. But as the history of both Britain and America shows, those countries choose to expand, eventually, though, greatly prospered. And it is difficult to overestimate the importance the impact this expansion has played on our lives. Look at it this way, imagine an undiscovered world, devoid of international markets and global communications. Such is the power of exploration.

Though the price will not be cheap, a Mankind that colonizes space will be immeasurably better off then one that does not. And while trying to do this, discoveries are made that helps people and jobs are created directly and indirectly from a variety of space programs. And if civilization does not expand into space we may become extinct. Extinction by meteorite is not as far fetched an idea as one may think. And our sun’s lifespan is finite. So, in short, we either expand, or die as a species. So why not now?

Finally, I think exploration, whether it is space, the seas, or of knowledge itself, brings out the best in humanity and to deny it would be to deny an essential part of humanity itself. The Universe is full of wonderful things just waiting for us to discover them. And I can think of nothing sadder then to never know what they are.

There will always be projects that need attention at home, but that is no excuse to mortgage humanity’s future. Do the Chinese remember that particular irrigation project now? I doubt it? They do know for sure that their size, resources, and population they have not flourished as they might have or made the same impact upon the world as the West has made.

Humanity is notoriously short sighted, a lack of vision that this time may be fatal.

Andy Rooney said on “60 Minutes” a few weeks back:

I don’t think being a minority makes you a victim of anything except numbers. The only things I can think of that are truly discriminatory are things like the United Negro College Fund, Jet Magazine, Black Entertainment Television, and Miss Black America. Try to have things like the UnitedCaucasianCollege Fund, Cloud Magazine, White Entertainment Television, or Miss White America; and see what happens…Jesse Jackson will be knocking down your door.

Guns do not make you a killer. I think killing makes you a killer. You can kill someone with a baseball bat or a car, but no one is trying to ban you from driving to the ball game.

I believe they are called the Boy Scouts for a reason, that is why there are no girls allowed. Girls belong in the Girl Scouts! ARE YOU LISTENING MARTHA BURKE?

I think that if you feel homosexuality is wrong, it is not a phobia, it is an opinion.

I have the right “NOT” to be tolerant of others because they are different, weird, or tick me off.

When 70% of the people who get arrested are black, in cities where 70% of the population is black, that is not racial profiling, it is the Law of Probability.

I believe that if you are selling me a milkshake, a pack of cigarettes, a newspaper or a hotel room, you must do it in English! As a matter of fact, if you want to be an American citizen, you should have to speak English!

My father and grandfather didn’t die in vain so you can leave the countries you were born in to come over and disrespect ours.

I think the police should have every right to shoot your sorry ass if you threaten them after they tell you to stop. If you can’t understand the word “freeze” or “stop” in English, see the above lines.

I don’t think just because you were not born in this country, you are qualified for any special loan programs, government sponsored bank loans or tax breaks, etc., so you can open a hotel, coffee shop, trinket store, or any other business.

We did not go to the aid of certain foreign countries and risk our lives in wars to defend their freedoms, so that decades later they could come over here and tell us our constitution is a living document; and open to their interpretations.

I don’t hate the rich I don’t pity the poor.

I know pro wrestling is fake, but so are movies and television. That doesn’t stop you from watching them.

I think Bill Gates has every right to keep every penny he made and continue to make more. If it ticks you off, go and invent the next operating system that’s better, and put your name on the building.

It doesn’t take a whole village to raise a child right, but it does take a parent to stand up to the kid; and smack their little behinds when necessary, and say “NO!”

I think tattoos and piercing are fine if you want them, but please don’t pretend they are a political statement. And, please, stay home until that new lip ring heals. I don’t want to look at your ugly infected mouth as you serve me French fries!

I am sick of “Political Correctness.” I know a lot of black people, and not a single one of them was born in Africa; so how can they be “African-Americans”? Besides, Africa is a continent. I don’t go around saying I am a European-American because my great, great, great, great, great, great grandfather was from Europe. I am proud to be from America and nowhere else

It is said that 86% of Americans believe in God. Therefore I have a very hard time understanding why there is such a problem in having “In God We Trust” on our money and having “God” in the Pledge of Allegiance. Why don’t we just tell the 14% to Shut Up and BE QUIET!!!

And if you don’t like my point of view, tough…

Both parties on Capitol Hill are on record: They are against free speech — for you and me. Don’t misunderstand. They are lions at the gate to block anyone challenging their own right to speak out. They just won’t sanction free speech for their critics.

Ultimately, they fail to realize, free speech either applies to everybody or it applies to nobody.

On a 218-209 vote, the House earlier this month approved a measure to shut down the so-called 527 independent political groups (527 is the number of the relevant tax code that applies to the groups in question).

211 Republicans voted yes and even bragged about it. This was their knee-jerk reaction to the left-wing 527s that ran amok in the 2004 presidential race. Only 18 principled Republicans (see below) voted no on this bald-faced violation of the First Amendment.

The Democrats opposed closing the loophole for exactly the same reason, figuring they could use George Soros’s money machine in the upcoming mid-term elections. Of course, in 2002, they voted in favor of the anti-free speech McCain-Feingold Act, an outrage against public discourse.

But the 527s escaped McCain-Feingold’s unconstitutional gag order through a “loophole,” as interpreted by the Federal Election Commission(FEC). So now the shoe was on the other foot.

Thus, the GOP reasoning on the latest vote went something like this: The Republicans are angels because they voted to close campaign funding “loopholes,” and Democrats voted to keep the same “loopholes” open, so they’re the bad guys. From a conservative standpoint, what’s wrong with that? Isn’t it a good Republican talking point?

Not likely. The mainstream media won’t spin it that way. To them, campaign finance reform is a holy cause only when it is perceived to benefit Democrats. So they will ignore it. At the same time, others see this for what it is: sucker bait, and the Republicans stumbled right into it.

In truth, the 527 loophole in the McCain-Feingold law — on balance — actually benefited Republicans far beyond any good it did for Democrats in ’04. The Soros-backed groups spent more money and ran more ads, but with minimal effect because the public tuned them out as ad-hominem attacks — which they were.

On the other hand, the pro-Republican ads of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth — with a late start and less money — were more effective. Why? Because they dealt with substance and (please note this) they presented solid facts as opposed to name-calling insults.

Quite often, politicians operate — or appear to operate — on the assumption that the public is stupid. After all, as noted above, it was the Democrats who mostly supported the McCain-Feingold bill in the first place, totally ignoring its obvious curbs on free speech. But this year, the same Dems suddenly became champions of the First Amendment when they detected the sweet smell of Soros money.

For the Republicans, the hypocrisy was the exact reverse. They largely opposed McCain-Feingold in 2002 because they feared its anti-free speech provisions would silence their supporters. Now they have backed the amendment to shut down the 527s because they’re afraid of Soros and Co. The noble cause of “free speech” suddenly is out the window.

This feeds into the widespread disrespect in which politicians of both parties are viewed by the public.

But there is more to the damage the Republicans have done to themselves here:

As this column has reported, liberals are scheming to shut down conservative commentary in the ideas marketplace. There are serious efforts to silence conservative talk radio and to “regulate” the Internet — possibly on an international scale through the United Nations.

“Oh, but they can’t do that, can they?” Yes, they can, and they will make the effort if the liberals regain control of Congress.

If that fight to silence the conservative media reaches the showdown stage, Republican complaints about stifling freedom of speech will carry less credibility if Democrats can say — through mainstream media megaphones — that the House GOP voted to shut down the 527s.

In addition to trashing the First Amendment, the House vote — if upheld by the Senate and signed by the president (Heaven forbid!) — will not accomplish the stated aim of “getting the money out of politics.” History has shown that trying to separate dollars from politics is like trying to prevent water from flowing downhill. Block one ditch and the stream will find another.

Senator John McCain is taking the lead in the effort to plug the 527 “loophole” that he himself and Senator Russ Feingold had written. The Arizona senator has been badgering the Federal Election Commission (with no success) to interpret his law in such a way as to put the 527s out of business and do even more damage to open public debate. This latest anti-527 amendment is his effort to finish that job. Registered Republicans might want to remember this in 2008 when Senator McCain seeks their votes in the presidential primaries. Free speech applies to everyone, right and left.

The Democrats have the Republicans right where they want them on this. That the GOP House members would hand them the advantage on a silver platter gives new meaning to the lament that we are asked to choose between the evil party and the stupid party.

This column has said before — and will say again — the only effective “campaign finance reform” is a requirement that campaign contributions be instantly reported on the Internet. Shutting people up because they are inconvenient to incumbent politicians is not “reform.” It is a step toward the police state.

Here are the House Republicans who stood up and voted no on this anti-free speech legislation. And remember if your Republican congressman is not on this list, he did not vote to uphold the First Amendment in this case: Roscoe Bartlett (Md.), Chris Chocoa (Ind.) Jeff Flake (Ariz.), Vito Fossella (N.Y.), Trent Franks (Ariz.), Scott Garrett (N.J.), Louie Gohmert (Tex.), Jeb Hensnarling (Tex.), Ernest Istook (Okla.), Walter Jones (N.C.), Steve King (Iowa), Connie Mack (Fla.), Cathy McMorris (Wash.), Randy Naugebauer (Tex.), Ron Paul (Tex.), Mike Pence (Ind.), John Shadegg (Ariz.), Lyle Westmoreland (Ga.).

——————————————————————————–
Wes Vernon is a Washington-based writer and veteran broadcast journalist.

By Robert Farrow

Jefferson might be disappointed, for it appears the former is more likely. For journalism as an unbiased, professional institution is already dead. The noble profession of journalism has been replaced by arrogant liberal editorialists more concerned with political spin then facts. And because of this the institution has suffered in prestige and profits. The Philadelphia Enquirer points out that…

So how does the media responding to this decline? By denying any bias and attacking the new media. Newsbusters quoted a counterattack by one of the queens of bias, the NYT, which by now has all the integrity of used car sales.

The Winds of Change points out that years ago there was an excellent PBS series, “The Constitution, That Delicate Balance”, in which public figures debated constitutional issues based on hypothetical situations. On one of the shows, Peter Jennings was given a hypothetical situation where he was accompanying US troops in wartime, and he received information that an enemy force was about to attack. Should he warn the US troops? Jennings said that he would.

Mike Wallace then lectured Jennings, telling him that he’d just thrown all of his “objectivity” and “journalistic credibility” out of the window. An honest journalist never interferes in the events he is covering, and he sets aside all of his personal and national feelings. Jennings was totally cowed by this and reversed himself. However, it gets worse. Random Probabilities reports that

last week the U.S. military wounded a CBS-credentialed photographer in Mosul. The initial statements by the military said that troops mistook his video camcorder for a shoulder-based weapon. A flurry of criticism ensued, including demands by Reporters Without Borders for a major investigation. Late on Friday, after WoC’s Good News Saturday began, I read a new info release from the command in Iraq. The cameraman is being held as a security risk.

Officials reported today multinational forces detained an individual who was injured April 6 when coalition forces returned fire after receiving enemy small-arms fire.

The detained individual was carrying press credentials from CBS News and was standing next to an armed insurgent who was killed during the firefight.

The U.S. military is conducting an investigation into the detained individual’s previous activities as well as his alleged support of anti-Iraqi government activities.

“There is probable cause to believe that (the detainee) poses an imperative threat to coalition forces,” a U.S. military statement said. “He is currently detained … and will be processed as any other security detainee.”
CNN reports some of the evidence that links the CBS stringer in Mosul to the insurgency:

U.S. military officials said the man’s camera held footage of a number of roadside bomb attacks against American troops, and they believe he was tipped off to those attacks…

One official said at least four videos in the man’s camera show roadside bomb attacks on U.S. troops. All had been shot in a manner that suggested the cameraman had prior knowledge of the attacks and had scouted a shooting location in sight of the target.

And just how did CBS come to credential this man? They are now suggesting it isn’t really THEIR fault:
In a written statement, the network said the man was referred to the network by a “fixer” in Tikrit “who has had a trusted relationship with CBS News for two years.”

Let’s see … two years ago … that would be right about the time the Coalition entered Iraq. How …. convenient.

Such is the decline of a noble profession.

by Curt

Very interesting stuff going on in the Mary McCarthy files. It appears many of us missed a few important connections:

One aspect of her background so far comparatively unexamined is her West African uranium connection. She served in a key government position concerned with West African nations producing yellowcake uranium at the same time that Joseph Wilson was working in the area. The two may be considered members of the “yellowcake community” within the Clinton national security apparatus of the 1990s.

There are more questions than answers for the moment, but yellowcake uramium is not only of strategic importance for WMD puposes, it is also a highly profitable commodity traded under UN supervision and restrictions, a set of circumstances known to produce extraordinary opportunities for both profit and corruption, as in Oil-for-Food. These comparatively still waters may run deep. Investigators equipped with both subpoena power and security clearance may be called for.

Mary McCarthy held positions in both African and Latin American analysis desks at Langley while Wilson was U.S. Ambassador to the Gabonese Republic from 1992 to 1995. Gabon was a producer of yellowcake uranium. Wilson’s powerful position in Gabon from 1992 to 1995 raises questions about his official trip to Niger to discredit President Bush’s claim that Iraq had sought quantities of uranium from Africa.

During his time in Gabon, Wilson must have been deeply knowledgeable about uranium production and trade there, and must have been familiar with officials of the French energy giant COGEMA, now consolidated into the French Areva Group, a firm closely involved with the French government which appoints members of its board. Joe Wilson has his own French connection.

So, who better to send to Africa to dig up dirt to refute intelligence findings of both the US and Great Britain concerning the Iraq-Africa yellowcake trade?

The article then goes into great detail about the loophole the UN institued to allow:

certain nuclear materials to be maintained and traded even by countries known to be covertly developing a nuclear capability or who supported terrorist groups.

And ask’s the question, what else could have been gained by this cabal of intelligence officials:

Speaking of dealing in commodities, this whole affair brings us back to square one and Mary McCarthy. One of her previous employerswas Beri, SA. Possibly by coincidence Beri provides a Mineral Extraction Risk Assessment service for up to 145 countries that are expected to show rapid growth in oil, gas, and mineral extraction capacity. If one had advance access to economic intelligence and had fostered close business ties over the years with uranium producers, huge financial gains would be possible. Could the Wilson-McCarthy-Africa connection may indicate another instance of US intelligence and Foreign Service personnel taking advantage of regulatory loopholes and lax security in third world countries for personal gain?

Macranger, the former intelligence official, believes he knows what is coming next:

I can’t tire of telling you how important it is that Mary Loose Lips has been brought down. More than just a random ‘discovery’ – she is the key to the lock. Guys at the agency and the DOJ knew exactly where to target – and they hit it dead on. In the coming days you will see why Senator Rockefeller HAD to make such an emergency visit to Syria in 2002. For a little tip, read here.

The “here” he is referring to is a Italian article that points out Rockefeller’s business dealings with none other, Cogema. Cogema runs the Niger uranium trade.

Getting a little fishy in here as AJStrata notices:

the Italian story mentions Senator Jay Rockefeller and his unique efforts against the invasion of Iraq. Among them is mention of “the relationship of the Senate American “. The story links the UN Oil For Food program and the Uranium trade (which I showed was possible in previous posts).

Then the story talks about a connection: “the French of the Cogema are in transactions with the magnates of the oil, comprised the group Rockefeller American. ” Wow. COGEMA is the French company (now Avera) that runs the Niger mines and monitors the uranium. Now I understand what Mac Ranger meant by this comment:

In the coming days you will see why Senator Rockefeller HAD to make such an emergency visit to Syria in 2002.

I had not made the connection until now that Wilson and Rockefeller both raced to the reqion in 2002! Maybe the heads up Rockefeller was giving Bathaast Bashir (and therefore Baathist Hussein) was not just about the pending war. The timing is right. Wilson went to Niger in February 2002, Rockefeller went to Syria in January 2002.

So far Mac has been dead on in his predictions. This one is going to be a doozy.

McCarthy now appears to be a little fish in a BIG pond whose scum layer is getting quite thick.

By Flopping Aces

James Kehl, official Democrat hatchet-man to The Jeffersonian, has spewed forth yet another pointless screed under the title “Demonizing Immigrants, Minorities.” You will find the article in its entirety here.

Ordinarily I would not waste the effort to dissect such nonsense point-by-point, but here it becomes necessary.

Baltimore County residents have experienced many hardships under the Ehrlich administration in the form of…fewer services provided to citizens by unqualified political appointees. [emphasis added]

You could argue endlessly about services provided from the government. I go along with Ronald Reagan’s observation that the most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the government and I’m here to help.” Let’s discuss instead the assertion about “unqualified political appointees.” As has become his usual practice, Kehl fails to provide a single example of someone appointed by Ehrlich who is unqualified for the job, or has done a less-than-adequate job. The very mention of political appointees conveniently neglects the fact that the governor in Maryland has the power to appoint people to certain jobs. It can be inferred that when the voters of the state overwhelmingly elected Governor Ehrlich, it was with the expectation that he would appoint functionaries willing to carry out his stated agenda. A person would have to be a fool to be elected to an office held by the opposing party for three decades and fail to recognize that all many people in appointed jobs would inclined to sabotage his work. Moreover, Kehl has harped on this subject before without ever naming a single former worker who was qualified for the job by anything except his/her loyalty to the party then in power. Thirty years on the job does not imply qualification for the job; it implies stagnation and the existence of a sinecure.

Baltimore County’s Republican delegates have chosen to support a bill [HB 1335] that would make English the official language of Maryland.

The fact that four of the 22 co-sponsors of the bill were Democrats does not fit Kehl’s argument, so he omits it.

Other than a minimal reduction of the state’s costs, this bill would do nothing to address the serious and complex problems presented by immigration. Instead, this is a bill that is designed to demonize immigrants and appeal to prejudice.

Anyone who bothers to read the text of HB 1335 will discover a 3-paragraph preamble, in which the authors praise the contributions to society of people from varied backgrounds, and specifically says that “it is not the purpose of this Act…to infringe on the rights of citizens to exercise the use of a language of their choice for private conduct…” In fact, 1335 does not prohibit the translation of written or oral state business into other languages. At the heart of it, the bill prohibits the introduction of legislation, the rendering of a court decision, or the conduct of a meeting in some language other than English. Given the hostile political climate created by Maryland Democrats in the last four years, I would not put it past someone to introduce a bill written only in Spanish, Farsi, Sanskrit or Icelandic, if only to waste time and stir the political pot. HB 1335 is a procedural matter, and nothing more.

Republicans have a history of attempting to achieve political gain by demonizing minorities.

An interesting assertion, considering the history of the Democrat party. Orville Faubus, a Democrat, was the governor who attempted to shut down the schools of Arkansas in 1954 rather than de-segregate them. George Wallace, a Democrat, uttered the words, “Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever,” at his 1963 inaugural as governor of Alabama. Democrat Senator Robert Byrd’s former Klan membership is established fact. And here in Maryland, it was Democrat George Perry Mahoney, Sr. who ran for governor on a slogan that was universally recognized to be racist: “Your home is your castle: protect it.”

African Americans, women, gays, poor people and other groups have been victims of this tactic in the past.

At the same time, I don’t recall that the Clinton administration did any real favors for these groups. Even the sainted JFK and LBJ deferred acting on Civil Rights matters until they were backed into a corner.

The assertion is that the majority of people are “victims” because of some unfair advantages enjoyed by a minority. Even though this assertion is blatantly false, it does emotionally appeal to a sense of victimization. It is a shameful and disgusting tactic.

A tactic invented and perfected by Democrats.

Legal and illegal immigrants have enriched our country by making contributions to our society.

I would like to hear of even a single incident in which an illegal immigrant has made a positive contribution to US society.

They have performed backbreaking, menial work for slavish wages.

As have many native-born Americans, including my parents.

Many economists believe that the labor performed by these immigrants is the reason the prices of certain goods and services are not higher.

…while other economists believe that the offshore manufacturing of goods by people working under sweatshop conditions is the reason certain goods and services do not cost more than they do. Truth of the matter is that economists too often work on the basis of belief, rather than measurable fact, and therefore their observations ought to be discounted entirely.

Indeed, America is a nation of immigrants because almost all citizens have ancestors that emigrated here from another country.

This is a heart-rending shibboleth, and completely irrelevant. When Sophia Borkowska, my paternal grandmother, arrived in the USA about a century ago, she had no expectation of “rights” in America. Like the other immigrants of her time, Sophia hoped for a better life in America, and came here prepared to petition the government to allow her to remain. Incidentally, she was fluent in English, Polish and four other languages when she set foot on our soil. And so far as I know, she raised no objection to being quarantined at the port of entry. My maternal ancestors who came from Germany understood that if they desired education conducted in the German language, that education would not be provided by the federal, state or local government, but by German schools established and funded by the immigrant community. Welfare and retirement were unheard of.

More recently, I have met immigrants who arrived here from Uganda, when Idi Amin ordered all ethnic Indians out of the country on 24 hours notice. They were MDs in their home country, and arrived here with only meager possessions, to learn that their medical credentials were not valid in the US. Rather than demonstrating in the streets or looking for handouts, they set about obtaining the credentials needed to practice medicine here, and are successful today.

A neighbor came here from Nigeria, well on his way to a medical degree. When his educational credits were determined not fully transferable, he set about educating himself in some other field, and became a citizen at the earliest opportunity.

My point is that there is “fairness” and “opportunity” aplenty for those who choose to avail themselves.

I do not know of a nation on Earth that welcomes immigrants with so few restrictions as the USA. Many require emigres to possess a certain amount of wealth, or to have some work skill that is in short supply among the natives. The words of Emma Lazarus, chiseled into the base of the Statue of Liberty that Mr. Kehl claims to revere are not meant to be interpreted to mean “come here and do as you please.” The nation has weathered other huge immigrant waves, and been the better for it, because those immigrants arrived here with the notion of becoming Americans, without hyphens. Immigration has only become problematic since our governments drifted so far towards socialism in the post-World War II era.

from BLogger 1947.

And to further illustrate the mentality of illegal immigrants. Illegals and their supporters now sink to intimidation.

May 1 immigrant boycott aims to “close” US cities By Dan Whitcomb

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) – Pro-immigration activists say a national boycott and marches planned for May 1 will flood America’s streets with millions of Latinos to demand amnesty for illegal immigrants and shake the ground under Congress as it debates reform.

Such a massive turnout could make for the largest protests since the civil rights era of the 1960s, though not all Latinos were comfortable with such militancy, fearing a backlash in Middle America.

“There will be 2 to 3 million people hitting the streets in Los Angeles alone. We’re going to close down Los Angeles, Chicago, New York, Tucson, Phoenix, Fresno,” said Jorge Rodriguez, a union official who helped organize earlier rallies credited with rattling Congress as it weighs the issue.

Immigration has split Congress, the Republican Party and public opinion. Conservatives want the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants returned to Mexico and a fence built along the border.

Others, including President George W. Bush, want a guest-worker program and a path to citizenship. Most agree some reform is needed to stem the flow of poor to the world’s biggest economy.

“We want full amnesty, full legalization for anybody who is here (illegally),” Rodriguez said. “That is the message that is going to be played out across the country on May 1.”

Organizers have timed the action for May Day, a date when workers around the world often march for improved conditions, and have strong support from big labor and the Roman Catholic church. They vow that America’s major cities will grind to a halt and its economy will stagger as Latinos walk off their jobs and skip school.

In California on Thursday, the state senate passed a resolution recognizing “The Great American Boycott of 2006,” saying it would educate the United States about the contributions made by immigrants. The measure passed 24-13 along party lines with dissenting Republicans arguing that it sanctioned lawbreaking and encouraged children to skip school.

Teachers’ unions in major cities have said children should not be punished for walking out of class. Los Angeles school officials said principals had been told that they should allow students to leave but walk with them to help keep order.

In Chicago, Catholic priests have helped organize protests, sending information to all 375 parishes in the archdiocese.

CRITICS CHARGE INTIMIDATION

Chicago activists predict that the demonstrations will draw 300,000 people.

In New York, leaders of the May 1 Coalition said a growing number of businesses had pledged to close and allow their workers to attend a rally in Manhattan’s Union Square.

Large U.S. meat processors, including Cargill Inc., Tyson Foods Inc and Seaboard Corp said they will close plants due to the planned rallies.

Critics accuse pro-immigrant leaders of bullying Congress and stirring up uninformed young Latinos by telling them that their parents were in imminent danger of being deported.

“It’s intimidation when a million people march down main streets in our major cities under the Mexican flag,” said Jim Gilchrist, founder of the Minuteman volunteer border patrol group. “This will backfire,” he said.

the link is here.

If they are going to act like this, kick ‘em all out.

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

April 27, 2006 — UN-PRESIDENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST?

When Hillary Clinton runs for president in 2008, Bill Clinton’s affiliation with billionaire Ron Burkle’s Yucaipa Companies could become the new Bill & Hill scandal – the equivalent of Whitewater.

It’s not that the various Yucaipa funds – which invest money for foreign and domestic investors – have done anything wrong; they haven’t. But the company’s investments have the potential to create conflicts of
interest for the Clintons.

Like any U.S. senator, Hillary regularly casts votes that help or harm various interests – including, inevitably, the interests of the multibillion-dollar Yucaipa funds.

The issue looms larger in the wake of a story in last Sunday’s New York Times, which quotes Burkle as estimating that he spends about 500 hours a year with the ex-president. That works out to about 10 hours a week – the closest thing Bill now has to a regular job.

The Times also reports that Bill stands to clear tens of millions of dollars – with virtually no risk – from his Yucaipa work. Yet Hillary’s Senate financial disclosures for 2003 and 2004 list as Bill’s only Yucaipa income “more than $1,000″ in “guaranteed payments” as a partner in Yucaipa Global Opportunities Fund 1, LLC.

How does that work? Most of Bill’s gains are backloaded – he’ll clear those millions if the funds average returns above 9 percent over their lifetime. And Yucaipa says they’re doing even better than that now.

But, until the funds are liquidated, there’s no income for Hillary to report – even though the riches are destined for her pocket, too. If Hillary’s a presidential candidate, such conflicts of interest are even more relevant.

Yet we have no real idea how much of a conflict all this truly poses. Only the Clintons know – because they won’t release their tax returns and will give only the most vague descriptions of Bill’s work with Yucaipa.

The Clintons should tell the voters exactly what Yucaipa investments Bill works on, and exactly what his compensation is.

Imagine if, back when George W. Bush was seeking the presidency, Laura Bush were lining up vast profits as an adviser to multibillion-dollar private investment brokers, who stood to benefit from specific federal
actions. If she wouldn’t disclose more, there’d be hell to pay. The same rule must apply to a couple where the husband’s investing while the wife runs for office.

As things stand, Hillary’s next disclosure form, due May 1, will report merely that Bill received in excess of $1,000 from Yucaipa – hardly the level of specificity to which her constituents (and future voters
nationwide) are entitled.

The case for disclosure rises even further as Burkle pursues a deal to buy a number of American daily newspapers, including the Philadelphia Inquirer, the largest paper in the swing state of Pennsylvania. Will
Bill’s partner own a string of newspapers at the same time that Hillary is running for president?

Then there’s the Dubai factor.

When Bill joined Yucaipa, the announcement said only that the former president would be working on two other funds – Yucaipa’s American Fund and its Corporate Initiative Fund. But the Times reports, “Clinton is
also a partner in a Yucaipa fund that invests in overseas ventures, for which he receives regular payments and would draw one-third of the profits when the fund is dissolved at least five years from now.”

And Yucaipa last year joined with the Dubai Investment Group to create a new U.S. company: DIGL Inc., which invests the private funds of Dubai’s crown prince, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid al Maktoun, the
fifth-richest man in the world according to Forbes. Even if Bill’s not directly working with that Yucaipa account, he and Hillary can expect to make millions via a company that works with the sheik.

(Of course, Dubai’s known past generosity to Bill and institutions he controls, such as his presidential library, totals a very solid six figures. During the recent ports-deal flap, that relationship had former
President Clinton advising and publicly defending Dubai – even as Sen. Clinton was denouncing it.)

Is Bill Clinton getting regular payments from a fund that invests the prince’s money? Again, the Clintons should tell us.

If a foreign head of state is even indirectly paying the spouse of a U.S. senator and presidential candidate, the need for disclosure becomes obvious. (The same principle also holds for Bill’s other hat – an ex-president posing as a disinterested commentator on America’s Middle East relationships.)

Learn these facts well. The tycoon, the ex-president and the sheik are likely to be recurring topics as a Hillary presidential candidacy looms.

Eileen McGann co-authored this column.

by Curt

This is actually quite huge and I am surprised not too many are writing about it. One of the most influential and senior Shia clerics in Iraq, Ayatollah Ali Sistani, has come out with calls to disarm the militia and ALL people should be loyal to the NATION, not their sects:

Shiite spiritual leader Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani has called for Iraq’s next government to dismantle the deadly militias that have pushed the country to the brink of civil war.

Sistani, perhaps the country’s most influential figure, told prime minister designate Nuri al-Maliki in a meeting at his Najaf residence that militias must be disarmed and that weapons should be in the hands of the government alone.

In the last year, the septuagenarian cleric has watched Shiite militias take up arms against the country’s Sunni minority in defiance of his repeated warnings against seeking revenge for rebel attacks.

“Weapons must be in the hands of government security forces that should not be tied to political parties but to the nation,” Sistani was quoted as saying in a statement released after his meeting with Maliki.

[…]During their meeting, the reclusive Sistani also offered a broad roadmap to Maliki for the formation of the new national unity government.

According to Sistani, “the first task for the government is fighting insecurity and putting an end to the terrorist acts that threaten innocents with death and kidnapping.”

The cleric added that the new cabinet needed “capable and honest people who have a good reputation and care about national interests, not personal, religious or sectarian interests.”

Sistani said special attention needed to be paid to fighting corruption and getting infrastructure, like water and electricity, “back up and running.”

I think Sadr will not be too happy, but with one of the most influential people in the country now calling for National pride and devotion rather then sect he will find it hard to resist.

Add in the fact that Iran has been cut at the knees with Jafari’s ouster and you get the feelings things will start to move quite quickly now:

The most important fact about Maliki’s election is that it’s a modest declaration of independence from Iran. The Iranians waged a tough behind-the-scenes campaign to keep Jafari in office. Tehran issued veiled threats to Iraqi political leaders, in written letters and through emissaries, that if they didn’t back Jafari, they would pay a price. In resisting this pressure, the political leaders were standing up for a unified Iraq. To succeed, Maliki must mobilize that desire for unity to break the power of the militias and insurgent groups.

“His reputation is as someone who is independent of Iran,” explained Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. ambassador to Baghdad. He explained that although Maliki initially went into exile in Iran, “he felt he was threatened by them” because of his political independence, and later moved to Syria. “He sees himself as an Arab” and an Iraqi nationalist, Khalilzad said.

[…]The Iranians “pressured everyone for Jafari to stay,” Khalilzad said. One senior Iraqi official said the gist of Iran’s letters was “stick with him, or else.” The phrasing was more subtle, including warnings that replacement of Jafari could “create instability” and damage the political prospects of those who opposed Iran’s diktat. The decisive blow came from Iraq’s Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani, who let it be known in the final days that Jafari had to go.

So we’re not talking about your normal everyday joe in Iraq. What this guy says holds a lot of clout.

Plus, look at the reaction your getting from everyday Iraqi’s about Zarqawi’s latest release:

Iraqis on Wednesday condemned terror mastermind Abu Musab al-Zarqawi as a foreigner determined to destroy their country, saying his new video promising more attacks may have surfaced in response to the breakthrough in the formation of a unity government.

[…] Sheik Khalid al-Attiyah, the Iraqi parliament’s newly appointed first deputy speaker, said the video shows that al-Zarqawi remains determined ‘to inflame a civil war’ in Iraq. But al-Attiyah said it also indicates the insurgent leader, an outsider to many Iraqis, fears the country’s new government will unify Shiites, Sunnis and Kurds.

[…] “I believe that al-Zarqawi was caught off guard by the new government taking shape because it will be very strong one representing all Iraqis,” al-Attiyah said.

And the only conclusion you can come to is that EVERY Iraqi citizen, from high level religious leaders to politicians to Mr. Joe Schmoo Iraqi is getting tired of those trying to disrupt the new Democracy in Iraq.

by Flopping Aces.

Demonstrating once again their commitment to developing nuclear power only for peaceful uses, the mullahs threaten US targets ‘in every possible part of the world’.

Iran intensified its war of words with America yesterday, threatening to retaliate against US interests across the world if attacked over its controversial nuclear programme.

Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said Iran would “give a double response to any strike”.

“The Americans should know that if they launch an assault against Islamic Iran, their interests in every possible part of the world will be harmed,” he said.

His threat came two days before the expiry of a UN deadline for Teheran to freeze its uranium enrichment programme.

from LGF.

Before hectoring the Governor for being supposedly outlandish, we think The Sun could use a little introspection.

“The governor has consistently portrayed himself as the last line of defense against the legislature’s anti-business leanings. And he sees Maryland’s business climate as locked in an Ice Age.”

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/bal-ed.chamber26apr26,0,477286.story?coll=bal-opinion-headlines

The Sun claims the Governor is ‘hectoring’, ‘chiding’, ‘partisan’, ‘demonizing’, and delivering ’self-serving diatribes for bad ideas’, but the reality is that other major newspapers agree with the Governor. And the other newspapers agree with the Governor on the very issues that The Sun describes in today’s editorial: city schools, anti-business legislature, and a partisan legislature.

Wall Street Journal:
“ANNAPOLIS, Md.–It should normally be difficult to pick the worst state legislature in America, but Maryland’s is way out in front. First it overrode GOP Gov. Bob Ehrlich’s veto of a special health-care tax on Wal-Mart. Democratic legislators then passed three election-related bills and again mustered the necessary three-fifths votes to overturn his vetoes. Together the election laws would so weaken safeguards against voter fraud as to make Maryland the nation’s prime example of Election Day irresponsibility.”

http://www.opinionjournal.com/cc/?id=110007939

Washington Post:
“This isn’t the first time a majority in a state legislature has sought electoral advantage by ramming a brazenly partisan measure down the throat of the minority party…But no matter which party is behind such partisan mischief, the effect is the same: to subvert the faith that Americans place in the electoral system’s fairness.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/04/AR2006040401755_pf.html

“Unfortunately, the partisan temperature in Annapolis these days is too high for constructive debate. Democrats have moved to block the state takeover…That’s too bad, because Baltimore schools need urgent attention…City officials insists they have a plan to reform the failing schools, but it’s really too late; they’ve been failing for too long, and there is no indication the city is up to the task of making significant improvements.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/09/AR2006040900784.html

Washington Times:
“It is no exaggeration to say that Maryland General Assembly serves as an example of what happens when a state legislature is completely controlled by one political party that is dominated by ideologues. The lawmakers view a successful session as one in which they create new opportunities for vote fraud; abandon Baltimore schoolchildren to a dysfunctional bureaucracy that has failed them miserably; and pile on new taxes and regulatory dictate that will drive business out of state.”

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20060412-091611-1469r.htm

from the Sun Lies.

a family member emailed me some picture of Pearl Harbor that I have not seen before, and I read alot. And I figured I would share these with you in memory of the brave men and women who gave their lives in the past and present for our freedom.

less we forget….

Thank you, men and women of our armed forces for your sacrifice, in the past and present.

Rove Testifies Again in CIA Leak Case
By PETE YOST

WASHINGTON – Top White House aide Karl Rove made his fifth grand jury appearance in the Valerie Plame affair Wednesday, undergoing several hours of questioning about a new issue that has come to light since the last time he testified.

Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald declined to comment at the conclusion of the grand jury session. Rove appeared at ease as he left the U.S. courthouse, joking to journalists to “move to the back” as the White House aide, his lawyer and several reporters entered an elevator to leave the building.

A week ago, Rove, the architect of Bush’s election victories, gave up his policy duties at the White House. He is returning to a full-time focus on politics with Republicans facing major problems in the upcoming midterm elections.
the link is here.

Okay, one desk jockey is revealed, and there are hearings, but McCarthy reveals a whole program and the media defends her.

that makes alot of sense……

and now the DNC has set up a defence fund to defend treason..

Outed CIA analyst Mary McCarthy is denying through her lawyers that she was the source for the Washington Post’s Dana Priest in revealing the secret prisons that housed terrorists overseas. McCarthy’s lawyers, though, aren’t throwing cold water on the notion that McCarthy may have had political inclinations and agendas that came into play with what even they termed unauthorized or undisclosed contacts with journalists.

Perhaps that’s why the Howard Dean and others at the Democrat National Committee are looking to some of their donors to set up a legal defense fund for McCarthy.

“If Scooter Libby can have a legal defense fund and website, then McCarthy should have one too,” says a DNC staffer. “The DNC wouldn’t set it up, we’d have some of our donors do it on the outside. There are plenty of consultants willing to help on this one, we think.”
from the American Spectator.

they just get lower and lower…….

WASHINGTON – Rising energy costs are nagging businesses and increasing their desire to pass them along to customers, although competitive forces are blunting their ability to do so, a Federal Reserve survey suggested Wednesday.

The survey, conducted before oil prices zoomed to a record high of $75.17 a barrel last week, said the economy was growing solidly in the spring even as companies and consumers fretted about high energy prices.”High energy prices were at the forefront of most districts’ mention of costs pressures,” the Fed survey said. “Many districts describe firms as attempting to raise selling prices but having mixed success, with price increases generally either smaller than the cost increases or less widespread.”

The Fed’s snapshot of economic conditions around the country is based on information supplied by the 12 regional Federal Reserve banks and collected before April 17. Some companies haven’t been able to pass on to customers all of their higher costs for energy and other raw materials, the Fed survey said. The Boston and Dallas regions said “competitive pressures are constraining some price increases.” The Richmond, Cleveland and Chicago regions mentioned manufacturers “limited ability to recoup higher costs.”

It said this had the effect of “constraining consumers’ driving and, indirectly, by reducing the income available for purchases after paying for home fuel and transportation fuel.” The Atlanta and Chicago regions noted the possibility of such energy-cost implications as a risk to the summer economic outlook.

Oil prices have moved off last week’s record high and are now hovering below $73 a barrel — still more expensive than a year ago. Gasoline prices have been marching up and are $3 a gallon in some areas.

the link is here.

Flopping Aces notes that Nancy Pelosi, at her dimwitted best, now says that the gas price is high because Bush is an oilman.

Thank you liberals, for hurting this country some more.

No manager or coach would expect himself to survive almost a decade of loosing seasons. In the case of the O’s the only constant factor has been not the management, but the ownership. It is a shame Peter Angelos is not as hard on himself on his management of the team as he is as hard on the players and coaches that have taken the fall for the decline of a once great baseball team.

Mexican Officials Line Their Pockets While Demanding U.S. Help

by Prof. George Grayson,

WASHINGTON (April 2006) — Mexican politicians continuously demand increased immigrant visas for their citizens, an expanded guest-worker program, and amnesty for their illegal aliens living north of the Rio Grande. But while Mexico expects the United States to solve its social problems by allowing the border to serve as a safety-valve for job seekers, its government officials enjoy princely lifestyles and spend little of the nation’s wealth on education and health care, which are crucial elements in promoting social mobility.

In a new report from the Center for Immigration Studies, ”Mexican Officials Feather Their Nests While Decrying U.S. Immigration Policy,” William and Mary government professor George W. Grayson outlines the lavish salaries and benefits that Mexico’s governing elite pays itself, as well as the minimal investments it makes in the country’s social development.

The report, on line at http://www.cis.org/articles/2006/back306.html , includes the following findings:

* President Vicente Fox ($236,693) makes more than the leaders of France ($95,658), the U.K. ($211,434), or Canada ($75,582).

* Although they are in session only a few months a year, members of Mexico’s Chamber of Deputies make $148,000 — substantially more than their counterparts in France ($78,000), Germany ($105,000), and congressmen throughout Latin America. At the end of the last three-year term, Mexican deputies voted themselves a $28,000 ”leaving-office bonus.”

* Members of the 32 state legislatures earn on average twice the amount earned by U.S. state legislators ($60,632 vs. $28,261). The salaries and bonuses of the lawmakers in Baja California ($158,149), Guerrero ($129,630), and Guanajuato ($111,358) exceed the salaries of legislators in California ($110,880), the District of Columbia ($92,500), Michigan ($79,650), and New York ($79,500).

* Average salaries (plus Christmas stipends known as aguinaldos) place the average compensation of Mexican governors at $125,759, which exceeds by almost $10,000 the mean earnings of their U.S. counterparts ($115,778). On average, governors received aguinaldos of $14,346 in 2005 — a year when 60 percent of Mexicans received no year-end bonuses.

* In 2002 Mexico earmarked only 6.1 percent of its GDP for health care. Mexico trailed Argentina (8.9%), Barbados (6.9%), Brazil (7.9%), Colombia (8.1%), Costa Rica (9.3%), Cuba (7.50 %), El Salvador (8.0%), Haiti (7.6%), and Nicaragua (7.9%).

* Mexico devoted just 5.3 percent of GDP to education in 2002, behind Barbados (7.6%), Cuba (9%), Honduras (7.2%), and Uruguay (8.5%).

George W. Grayson is the Class of 1938 Professor of Government at the College of William & Mary. Random House-Mondadori has just published Mesias Mexicano, his book on Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the front-runner in the July 2 Mexican presidential election.

President George W. Bush named Fox News Radio host Tony Snow as White House press secretary on Wednesday in his latest move to shake up his staff and breathe new life into his presidency.

Snow, 50, is the first Washington pundit to become White House press secretary. In his role as a conservative commentator he has sometimes criticized the president, a point Bush could not resist mentioning in introducing Snow as the replacement for long-time loyalist Scott McClellan.

“He’s not afraid to express his own opinions,” Bush said with a smile. “He sometimes has disagreed with me, I asked him about those comments and he said, ‘You should have heard what I said about the other guy.”‘

Joe Lockhart, a press secretary for Democratic President Bill Clinton, said Bush does not have a messenger problem, he has a message problem, and that Snow faces the challenge of changing the culture of a White House “that prizes secrecy and frowns upon leveling with the American people.”
the link is here.

The press secretary for Democratic President Bill Clinton? Now there is an unbiased opinion. That is as bad as the reporter getting a friend of Mary McCarthy as a source to counter the accusations against her.

What a pathetic bunch…….Mr Snow will have his hands full.

by Haider Ajina

The following is my translation of news in Iraq’s Alsabah newspaper of April 25th.

Baghdad inspector general office announced that administrative and financial corruption in Baghdad’s government offices has declined noticeably in comparison to a year ago. The inspector general’s office has obviously been on the right track to deter these incidences.

The inspector general of the capital (Tama’ah Jebar Loog) in an interview with ‘Alsabah’ said that his office has ended 117 cases of administrative corruption and forwarded thirty of them to courts. Forty other cases are currently under investigation. This significant number of cases has contributed to the decline in corruption. Our doors remain open to all the populace who have a complaint or incidents involving government employees. We have set up complaint boxes and direct hot lines to accommodate our citizens.

Loog talked about conferences & meetings held with government employees to discus and talk about negative issues and areas of disorder. This was done to focus on remedies and ways to prevent all types of government corruption. It is important to implement the special laws governing the inspector general office and the administration, during these challenging times. Specially law ‘57’ concerning the inspector’s offices and keeping them independent from the government allowing it to perform its duties properly.

Loog added that his office which has a budget of 600 million Iraqi Dinars has contributed greatly to the reduction of administrative corruption by responding to complaints and dealing with them. He concluded by asking the press and the citizens of Iraq to help the inspectors office by providing accurate information and its sources. The press has a duty to inform the public so we may all reach the same goal, that of protecting public assets and the beauty of our capital city.

His comments,

As Paul Bremer III left Iraq he created the ‘Inspector General’s’ office. An office, which’s duty, is to oversee government administration, uncover and prevent corruption, increase government efficiency and collect public complaints against government administration and bureaucracy. He made the office independent of the government and judiciary and insisted on its independence. This decision is paying tremendous dividends in uncovering and preventing corruption. The office has a long ways to go but its usefulness and independence is serving Iraqis well. This office is quite unique in the Arab world. Most citizens in Arabic countries are at the mercy and whim of their government and bureaucrats with minimal if no avenues for grievance. This oversight of government gives the Iraqi populace a great sense of wroth and ownership of their country. Iraqis realize that the government is here to serve them and the public interest not a few elite nor it self.

Well, thanks to the influence of the liberal philosophy, the value of life continues to decline.

What’s in the water at St. Luke’s Hospital?
by ArrMatey

It seems that the criteria used by hospitals and courts to allow euthenasia of the patients in their care keeps getting simpler and easier for those who want to “pull the plug”. Via WorldNetDaily today, I read that “[a]n ill woman in Houston could die within days because a hospital ethics committee has voted to take her off life support – this despite the fact the 54-year-old is not in a coma, is not brain dead and wants to go on living, her family says.”

That article mentions a blog reporting on the matter that gets right to the point:

For years I have been warning that bioethicists are getting their ducks in a row to permit them to refuse wanted life sustaining treatment that is removed because it keeps the patient alive, not because it doesn’t provide medical benefit. These are value judgments, not medical determinations.

That’s a good point. The standard for deciding who to let die versus who to treat keeps shifting, and rapidly.
There is more reporting from KHOU in Houston here, with video of the woman’s family. In the KHOU story, they mention another recent case of St. Luke’s hospital’s ethics committee deciding to terminate life support on another one of their patients, which in turn caused me to remember a third such case in roughly the same year coming from St. Luke’s in Houston. That was the case of Sun Hudson, which I wrote about over a year ago here. At the time I was able to interview the attorney for Sun Hudson’s mother and was appalled at the conduct of the judge in the case who sided with St. Luke’s without allowing Sun’s mother to present evidence.

So what’s in the water at St. Luke’s Hospital? I’m sure it is a large facility, and statistically we should expect a certain number of decisions each year regarding termination of life support. But why do I keep hearing about St. Luke’s in the context of wanting to terminate (or euthanize, if you prefer) so many patients in opposition to the wishes of the patients’ families?

Who sits on that ethics committee? I don’t literally want anyone to get a list of names (I’m serious about that — that sort of thing gives the blogosphere a bad name), but I would like to know the professional qualifications and experience of the members making these decisions. Is there anyone out there with the ability to find out? What, exactly, gives these people the ability to know better than family members, and in some cases the patients themselves, about whether one’s life is worth living? The question is not rhetorical; I want to know.

Andrea Clark is scheduled to be removed from life support five days from today.

from Stop the ACLU.

I doubt if any one has noticed that as religion and Christian values has declined, abortion and murder has increased. To me there is a link between abortion and murder. If life has no value on the womb, why would it have value outside the womb? The attacks on Christianinty has resulted in the decline in the value of life.
However, exactly the opposite conclusion was reached by a member of the Anti-Christian Liberal Union.

Critics of the ACLU have long suspected that the organization hates Christians. Well, one ACLU official does his best to prove it:

It’s in the choice of words, but you decide.. is American Civil Liberties Union chief Joe Cook calling the Tangipahoa Parish School Board members a bunch of terrorists?
Cook was asked about a meeting Monday, during which the school board spoke to all teachers and workers about policy for this year, and had been asked by the ACLU to remind teachers to be extra careful not to allow prayer at school functions. This is what the ACLU chief had to say:

“They believe that they answer to a higher power, in my opinion. Which is the kind of thinking that you had with the people who flew the airplanes into the buildings in this country, and the people who did the kind of things in London.”

Tangipahoa school officials tell reporters it’s ludicrous to compare the Tangipahoa school board’s “fight for religious freedom and freedom of expression in schools” with terrorist motivated attacks.
from Stop the ACLU.

Of course this does not stop the ACLU from representing other religions.

Hamid Hayat Found Guilty In Lodi Terror Trial
by Jay

A twist in the trial, as the father Umer Hayat gets a mistrial, his son Hamid Hayat is found guilty.

Hamid Hayat, the 23-year-old Lodi man on trial for terrorist-related activities in Sacramento federal court, was found guilty Tuesday, just hours after a mistrial was declared in the related trial of his father, who was accused of lying to the FBI to cover up for his son.
Hayat was found guilty of providing material support to terrorists by allegedly attending an al-Qaida camp while visiting Pakistan in 2003 and three counts of lying about it. He faces up to 39 years in prison if convicted of all charges against him.

The jury’s verdict came roughly six hours after U.S. District Court Judge Garland E. Burrell Jr. declared a mistrial in the case of Hayat’s father, Umer Hayat, after the jury in notified the judge they were deadlocked.

And yes, this admitted terror supporter was defended by CAIR and ACLU.

from Stop the ACLU.

Welcome to the twisted, evil world of the ACLU.

The International Committee of the Red Cross admits that the terrorists at Guantanamo Bay are not being brutally tortured by sadistic guards: Guantanamo conditions ‘improved’. (Hat tip: Aussiemagpie.)

DETAINEES are being better treated at the US prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, and the Red Cross is satisfied with its access to them, the humanitarian agency’s chief said.

Jakob Kellenberger, president of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), said detention conditions at Guantanamo had “improved considerably” over the past four years. “There have also been improvements in the treatment of prisoners, but that does not mean that there are no longer any problems at all,” he said. …

But he said the ICRC and Washington remained at odds over whether the detainees, which the United States calls “enemy combatants”, are protected under the 1949 Geneva Convention on the rights of prisoners of war.

“On this issue, I don’t see a possible agreement at this stage. But we are not abandoning our efforts,” he said.

He called it “extremely regrettable” that intense media focus on Guantanamo seemed to distract from troubled sites in places like Chechnya and Burma, where the ICRC has suspended prison visits over disagreements with local authorities.

I’m immensely relieved to know that the horrible days of peanut butter abuse are behind us.
from LGF.

because only news that hurts this country makes today’s headlines.

And from the “you think they would have learned by now department….”

LGF also reports that Dubai is about to take over a British firm that makes parts for US military aircraft and tanks, but oddly, this deal is going almost unnoticed.

Not good…….