Always decide for yourself whether anything posted in my blog has any information you choose to keep.
Monday, February 27, 2006
Now we know why it works.
"Chicken Soup for the Cold
" Mom was right. Chicken soup really can help you get over a cold.
Ingredients in chicken soup have anti-inflammatory properties that inhibit the movement of neutrophils into airways. Neutrophils are white blood cells that contribute to the inflammation that causes cold symptoms. Combat your next cold with plenty of rest, lots of fluids, and a bowl of homemade chicken soup."
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Just got an email showing one. Did a search and came up with this link which gives a picture and article about them.
Sunday, February 26, 2006
This is a letter quoted directly from Powerlineblog.com from the Mayor of Tall 'Afar, Iraq praising the work of our troops combating terrorism. The praise for our efforts are too great to allow it to go unnoticed .... but per usual if it doesn't conform to progressive-socialist re-education propaganda machine's message ... it does NOT get aired. Come to think of it our mainstream media is becoming more like Pravda and Xinhua every day.
Over at Mudville Gazette Greyhawk has posted a letter from the Mayor of Tall 'Afar, Iraq to the men and women of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment and their families (received via a family member):
In the Name of God the Compassionate and Merciful
To the Courageous Men and Women of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment, who have changed the city of Tall’ Afar from a ghost town, in which terrorists spread death and destruction, to a secure city flourishing with life.
To the lion-hearts who liberated our city from the grasp of terrorists who were beheading men, women and children in the streets for many months.
To those who spread smiles on the faces of our children, and gave us restored hope, through their personal sacrifice and brave fighting, and gave new life to the city after hopelessness darkened our days, and stole our confidence in our ability to reestablish our city.
Our city was the main base of operations for Abu Mousab Al Zarqawi. The city was completely held hostage in the hands of his henchmen. Our schools, governmental services, businesses and offices were closed. Our streets were silent, and no one dared to walk them. Our people were barricaded in their homes out of fear; death awaited them around every corner. Terrorists occupied and controlled the only hospital in the city. Their savagery reached such a level that they stuffed the corpses of children with explosives and tossed them into the streets in order to kill grieving parents attempting to retrieve the bodies of their young. This was the situation of our city until God prepared and delivered unto them the courageous soldiers of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment, who liberated this city, ridding it of Zarqawi’s followers after harsh fighting, killing many terrorists, and forcing the remaining butchers to flee the city like rats to the surrounding areas, where the bravery of other 3d ACR soldiers in Sinjar, Rabiah, Zumar and Avgani finally destroyed them.
I have met many soldiers of the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment; they are not only courageous men and women, but avenging angels sent by The God Himself to fight the evil of terrorism.
The leaders of this Regiment; COL McMaster, COL Armstrong, LTC Hickey, LTC Gibson, and LTC Reilly embody courage, strength, vision and wisdom. Officers and soldiers alike bristle with the confidence and character of knights in a bygone era. The mission they have accomplished, by means of a unique military operation, stands among the finest military feats to date in Operation Iraqi Freedom, and truly deserves to be studied in military science. This military operation was clean, with little collateral damage, despite the ferocity of the enemy. With the skill and precision of surgeons they dealt with the terrorist cancers in the city without causing unnecessary damage.
God bless this brave Regiment; God bless the families who dedicated these brave men and women. From the bottom of our hearts we thank the families. They have given us something we will never forget. To the families of those who have given their holy blood for our land, we all bow to you in reverence and to the souls of your loved ones. Their sacrifice was not in vain. They are not dead, but alive, and their souls hovering around us every second of every minute. They will never be forgotten for giving their precious lives. They have sacrificed that which is most valuable. We see them in the smile of every child, and in every flower growing in this land. Let America, their families, and the world be proud of their sacrifice for humanity and life.
Finally, no matter how much I write or speak about this brave Regiment, I haven’t the words to describe the courage of its officers and soldiers. I pray to God to grant happiness and health to these legendary heroes and their brave families.
NAJIM ABDULLAH ABID AL-JIBOURI
Mayor of Tall 'Afar, Ninewa, Iraq
Greyhawk adds that members of the Regiment are now returning home to Ft. Carson, Colorado.
Col. McMaster is the Commander of the Regiment and a Ph.D. in American history. This past September, Col. McMaster briefed the Pentagon press corps on Operation Restoring Rights by video from Iraq that was accessible here (I can't find it at the moment). Forty minutes long, Col. McMaster's briefing was utterly compelling, including an account of the discovery of an enemy house rigged with chemical weapons. You may also wish to check out Col. McMaster's Dereliction of Duty: Johnson, McNamara, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the Lies That Led to Vietnam.
Posted by Scott at 05:14 PM "
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Monday, February 20, 2006
[Editor's Note: Below are selected excerpts from Brigitte Gabriel's speech delivered at the Intelligence Summit in Washington DC, Saturday February 18, 2006].
We gather here today to share information and knowledge. Intelligence is not merely cold hard data about numerical strength or armament or disposition of military forces. The most important element of intelligence has to be understanding the mindset and intention of the enemy. The West has been wallowing in a state of ignorance and denial for thirty years as Muslim extremist perpetrated evil against innocent victims in the name of Allah.
I was ten years old when my home exploded around me, burying me under the rubble and leaving me to drink my blood to survive, as the perpetrators shouted “Allah Akbar!” My only crime was that I was a Christian living in a Christian town. At 10 years old, I learned the meaning of the word "infidel."
I had a crash course in survival. Not in the Girl Scouts, but in a bomb shelter where I lived for seven years in pitch darkness, freezing cold, drinking stale water and eating grass to live. At the age of 13 I dressed in my burial clothes going to bed at night, waiting to be slaughtered. By the age of 20, I had buried most of my friends--killed by Muslims. We were not Americans living in New York, or Britons in London. We were Arab Christians living in Lebanon.
As a victim of Islamic terror, I was amazed when I saw Americans waking up on September 12, 2001, and asking themselves "Why do they hate us?" The psychoanalyst experts were coming up with all sort of excuses as to what did we do to offend the Muslim World. But if America and the West were paying attention to the Middle East they would not have had to ask the question. Simply put, they hate us because we are defined in their eyes by one simple word: "infidels."
Under the banner of Islam "la, ilaha illa allah, muhammad rasoulu allah," (None is god except Allah; Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah) they murdered Jewish children in Israel, massacred Christians in Lebanon, killed Copts in Egypt, Assyrians in Syria, Hindus in India, and expelled almost 900,000 Jews from Muslim lands. We Middle Eastern infidels paid the price then. Now infidels worldwide are paying the price for indifference and shortsightedness.
Tolerating evil is a crime. Appeasing murderers doesn't buy protection. It earns one disrespect and loathing in the enemy's eyes. Yet apathy is the weapon by which the West is committing suicide. Political correctness forms the shackles around our ankles, by which Islamists are leading us to our demise.
America and the West are doomed to failure in this war unless they stand up and identify the real enemy: Islam. You hear about Wahabbi and Salafi Islam as the only extreme form of Islam. All the other Muslims, supposedly, are wonderful moderates. Closer to the truth are the pictures of the irrational eruption of violence in reaction to the cartoons of Mohammed printed by a Danish newspaper. From burning embassies, to calls to butcher those who mock Islam, to warnings that the West be prepared for another holocaust, those pictures have given us a glimpse into the real face of the enemy. News pictures and video of these events represent a canvas of hate decorated by different nationalities who share one common ideology of hate, bigotry and intolerance derived from one source: authentic Islam. An Islam that is awakening from centuries of slumber to re-ignite its wrath against the infidel and dominate the world. An Islam which has declared "Intifada" on the West.
America and the West can no longer afford to lay in their lazy state of overweight ignorance. The consequences of this mental disease are starting to attack the body, and if they don't take the necessary steps now to control it, death will be knocking soon. If you want to understand the nature of the enemy we face, visualize a tapestry of snakes. They slither and they hiss, and they would eat each other alive, but they will unite in a hideous mass to achieve their common goal of imposing Islam on the world.
This is the ugly face of the enemy we are fighting. We are fighting a powerful ideology that is capable of altering basic human instincts. An ideology that can turn a mother into a launching pad of death. A perfect example is a recently elected Hamas official in the Palestinian Territories who raves in heavenly joy about sending her three sons to death and offering the ones who are still alive for the cause. It is an ideology that is capable of offering highly educated individuals such as doctors and lawyers far more joy in attaining death than any respect and stature, life in society is ever capable of giving them.
The United States has been a prime target for radical Islamic hatred and terror. Every Friday, mosques in the Middle East ring with shrill prayers and monotonous chants calling death, destruction and damnation down on America and its people. The radical Islamists’ deeds have been as vile as their words. Since the Iran hostage crisis, more than three thousand Americans have died in a terror campaign almost unprecedented in its calculated cruelty along with thousands of other citizens worldwide. Even the Nazis did not turn their own children into human bombs, and then rejoice at their deaths as well the deaths of their victims. This intentional, indiscriminate and wholesale murder of innocent American citizens is justified and glorified in the name of Islam.
America cannot effectively defend itself in this war unless and until the American people understand the nature of the enemy that we face. Even after 9/11 there are those who say that we must “engage” our terrorist enemies, that we must “address their grievances”. Their grievance is our freedom of religion. Their grievance is our freedom of speech. Their grievance is our democratic process where the rule of law comes from the voices of many not that of just one prophet. It is the respect we instill in our children towards all religions. It is the equality we grant each other as human beings sharing a planet and striving to make the world a better place for all humanity. Their grievance is the kindness and respect a man shows a woman, the justice we practice as equals under the law, and the mercy we grant our enemy. Their grievance cannot be answered by an apology for who or what we are.
Our mediocre attitude of not confronting Islamic forces of bigotry and hatred wherever they raised their ugly head in the last 30 years, has empowered and strengthened our enemy to launch a full scale attack on the very freedoms we cherish in their effort to impose their values and way of life on our civilization.
If we don't wake up and challenge our Muslim community to take action against the terrorists within it, if we don't believe in ourselves as Americans and in the standards we should hold every patriotic American to, we are going to pay a price for our delusion. For the sake of our children and our country, we must wake up and take action. In the face of a torrent of hateful invective and terrorist murder, America’s learning curve since the Iran hostage crisis is so shallow that it is almost flat. The longer we lay supine, the more difficult it will be to stand erect."
Monday, February 20, 2006
Seems that although China is rising as an economic super power it is doing so with human rights abuses such as torture and murder which is typical of any communist government. Currently land is being seized from landowners who are not properly compensated and when they object they are systematically tortured, killed and those deaths are covered up beyond any measure we in the US could imagine.
I'm about halfway through this commentary about the communist takeover in China ["Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party] and how it was done, how many human beings were systematically exterminated over the years and methods used to bring about a complete takeover of a nation geographically about as big as the US. A rather long read, very worthwhile and gives an excellent background as to why currently there are usually numerous civil protests across China that the government is having a hard time keeping the lid on with technology available today.
"Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party
"More Mass Suppression in Shanwei
By Gao Ling
Epoch Times China Staff
"Two and a half months have passed since the bloody massacre in Dongzhou village, Shanwei, Guangdong province. Many people are watching closely the current situation of the villagers. Since the bloody massacre, the government has set a tight blockade in the village, they are continuously searching, arresting and tapping telephone calls.
For more than seventy days, Dongzhou villagers were afraid to visit other villagers or answer telephone interviews. On January 24, all patients from the hospitals were forced to go home to their villages. After the Chinese New Year, the suppression by the CCP escalated, villagers were once again arrested, tortured and interrogated. Now they can no longer tolerate the maltreatment.
Orphans Beg on the Streets
On the morning of Feb 18, at 8 am, victims of the Shanwei incident and family members of those missing and arrested, escorted a dozen orphaned children who have no income to survive on, to Dongzhou Second Village and started begging on the street. Some relatives of the missing villagers cried openly asking for justice, sparking off a mass gathering of other villagers. Villagers expressed concern that the CCP's unscrupulous humiliation would spark off a rebellion.
Children of injured villagers, and orphans, begging on the streets. (The Epoch Times)
The ages of the children who were out begging, ranged from 3 to 12 years old. Some of them had lost their fathers who were beaten to death, leaving behind a widowed mother and child, with no means of supporting themselves. Some belonged to parents who were wanted for being "instigators" of the shooting incident and were forced to flee from home, and others had parents who were badly injured and unable to work.
Witnessing the tragic scene of children begging on their knees and cries from the victims finally ignited a resentment in the hearts of the Dongzhou villagers who for nearly eighty days had tolerated this incident. More and more villagers gathered together and many donated money to the orphans. An elderly man angrily reprimanded the government officials who had rushed to the scene, he said "I am 77 years old this year, arrest me and beat me if you wish. The Communist Party are used to lying! This is ridiculous!"
A crowd gathers to protest. (The Epoch Times)
People from other villagers were saying, it looks like our village representative has returned. According to the villagers, the three village representatives who were arrested were highly regarded.. When they were still around, the local village official and police were afraid of them and would not dare to interfere with the villagers. However since their arrest during the December 6 incident, under the insistence of the government, these local bullies wantonly arrested and beat the villagers, forcefully entering their houses and make house searches as they pleased. The villagers were too afraid to voice their anger. But today it seemed as if the village representative was around, everyone shouted and cried to their hearts content all the grievances that had been suppressed .
The crowds slowly dispersed around 3 pm in the afternoon after villagers urged the children to return home. However the residents surmised that these children who have lost the means to a livelihood, will soon be back to beg for a living as the government will not resolve this problem.
The child of severely injured Liu Muzong, has nobody in her family to care for her and she has no means to survive. (The Epoch Times)
Around Jan 24, eight injured hospitalised villagers including Chen Tianjin, Tang Dahan, and Liu Muzong were evacuated from the hospital by the authorities with the excuse of going home to celebrate the Chinese New Year. Some of them saw the real intention of the government and refused to leave the hospital. They were persuaded everyday to change their minds and finally they gave in and returned to their village. At present, there is no one who cares about their situation - there is no doctor, and a lack of medication to treat their injuries.
A few days ago, several injured villagers who had difficulty supporting themselves went to the government office to ask for subsistence. But as usual the officials ignored them and even reprimanded them severely. Several family members of those detained by the authorities requested to visit them to give them something for New Year, but were also rejected.
The whereabouts of the missing remains unknown. Many villagers speculate that these villagers were probably massacred and their bodies could have been cremated during the December 6 incident. The authorities tried to cover up the actual death toll and used "detention" as an excuse to deceive family members and avoid public scrutiny.
The Dongzhou villagers had a quiet Chinese New Year. The villagers on the run were afraid to return. And once the New Year festivities were over, the authorities started to arrest villagers and repeatedly tried to force them to reveal where explosives were hidden. The police beat and kicked them when the villagers told them they did not know.. All of them suffered varying degrees of torture.
Yet in the official media it was reported that everything was peaceful. According to the villagers' description, since the December 6 incident, the government has continuously broadcast propaganda on the Shanwei TV station news, that they had sent out many task forces into Dongzhou village to help resolve the situation of the poor and had taken out social insurance for the villagers, and that the situation in Dongzhou village has returned to normal.
But in reality, everything is in contrary to what is reported in the news. The villagers said, the government tells lies openly, villagers have no recourse to justice, their livelihood is destroyed and they live in fear and under pressure everyday. Sooner or later, the villagers will rebel. Related articles:
Massacre in China Draws Global Attention
Shanwei: Father Pleads Guilty For Son, Arrested Villagers Tortured
After Massacre Terror Continues in Chinese Village
Shanwei Shootings: Photos from Shanwei
Shanwei Shooting: Photo Gallery
Bloody Suppression of Farmers in Shanwei; 70 People Shot to Death by Police
Sunday, February 19, 2006
After 9-11 I personally don't care how many pledges are given, how many safeguards are put into place, I am absolutely opposed to this group buying a company which manages even one US port. Please contact your senators and representatives if you have any strong feelings about this issue.
"Chertoff says Dubai port deal includes safeguards
"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The homeland security chief said on Sunday a deal for a Dubai-based company to manage major U.S. ports would include security safeguards, but a Republican senator urged a probe and called the Bush administration "tone deaf politically" for approving it.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff said the Bush administration had approved the sale of British firm P&O, which manages six U.S. ports including New York, to Dubai Ports World after a classified review and the deal would include safeguards to protect U.S. national security.
"You can be assured that before a deal is approved we put safeguards in place, assurances in place, that make everybody comfortable that we are where we need to be from a national security viewpoint," Chertoff said on ABC's "This Week with George Stephanopoulos."
But Sen. Lindsey Graham, a South Carolina Republican, said it was a mistake for the administration to approve the sale and called on Congress to investigate it.
"It's unbelievably tone deaf politically at this point in our history, four years after 9/11, to entertain the idea of turning port security over to a company based in the UAE who avows to destroy Israel," Graham said on "Fox News Sunday."
"I don't think now is the time to outsource major port security to a foreign-based company," he said." ..... continued
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Just picked this up from another site. Satellite photos showing locations.
A senior Syrian journalist reports Iraq WMD located in three Syrian sites
Nizar Nayuf (Nayyouf-Nayyuf), a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime, said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper “De Telegraaf,” that he knows the three sites where Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are kept. The storage places are:
click for images of Iraq's WMD location in Syria
-1- Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud missiles. Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in these tunnels.
-2- The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there is a big Syrian air force camp. Vital parts of Iraq's WMD are stored there.
-3-. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south of Homs city.
Nayouf writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by the commanders of Saddam Hussein's Special Republican Guard, including General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad's cousin. Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by the Assad family.
In February 2003, a month before America's invasion in Iraq, very few are aware about the efforts to bring the Weapons of Mass Destruction from Iraq to Syria, and the personal involvement of Bashar Assad and his family in the operation.
Nayouf, who has won prizes for journalistic integrity, says he wrote his letter because he has terminal cancer.
Click here for Satellite Images of the Syrian-Iraq's WMD Locations
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Second person stating weapons are in Syria. Previous post was about Georges Sada https://blogs.lotterypost.com/konane/2006/01/iraqs-wmd-secreted-in-syria-sada-says.htm
Now someone new is saying the same thing.
Looks like it has feathers, waddling, quacking but pretty sure the MSM is going to call it a Trojan Horse, but then again they would if they dug them up all by themselves and saw verifiable proof..... repeat a lie long enough and it becomes the truth to the gullible.
"Saddam general: WMDs in Syria
Another former confidant of ex-dictator makes claim, also links Iraq to al-Qaida
Posted: February 15, 2006
1:00 a.m. EasternSource WorldNetDaily.com
A former general and friend of Saddam Hussein who defected but maintains close contact with Iraq claims the regime supported al-Qaida with intelligence, finances and munitions and believes weapons of mass destruction are hidden in Syria.
Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, southern regional commander for Saddam Hussein's Fedayeen militia in the late 1980s, spoke with Ryan Mauro of WorldThreats.com.
Known as the "Butcher of Basra," al-Tikriti commanded units that dealt with chemical and biological weapons. He defected shortly before the Gulf War in 1991.
Last month, Saddam Hussein's No. 2 Air Force officer, Georges Sada, told the New York Sun Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were moved to Syria six weeks before the war started. Sada claimed two Iraqi Airways Boeing jets converted to cargo planes moved the weapons in a total of 56 flights. They attracted little attention, he said, because they were thought to be civilian flights providing relief from Iraq to Syria, which had suffered a flood after a dam collapse in 2002.
Discussing Saddam's support of terrorism, al-Tikriti said the dictator's regime sponsored Palestinian groups with logistical and material support.
For a time, support for al-Qaida was limited, the former general said, mainly because al-Qaida's aim was to create an Islamic empire while Saddam wanted a secular Arab nationalist empire.
"They only really came to terms in the mid '90s due to the fact that both knew they shared the same short-term enemy," the general said. "Once they came to terms on this, Saddam provided al-Qaida with intelligence support and whatever money or munitions they could provide."
Al-Tikriti said Saddam "had very long-standing contacts in the black market as well as with Moscow and would provide whatever munitions he could through these contacts."
The secular Baathists and radical Islamists certainly are able to put aside their differences to cooperate against the U.S., he insisted.
"If you look in Iraq today, you are witnessing Arab nationalist terrorist organizations and Islamist terrorist organizations working together to fight the United States."
Al-Tikriti dismissed the commonly heard claim that the U.S. helped bring Saddam to power, calling it "absolutely ludicrous."
The Baathist revolution, he said, was backed by the Soviet Union because of the shared socialist ideology.
"I was there helping with the revolution and worked on two occasions with Soviet KGB officials to help train us, much like the United States did with the Taliban during the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan," he said. "The United States never directly gave us any WMDs but rather ingredients. They were not mixed and these 'ingredients' could have been easily used for commercial use but were rather used to build low life chemical weapons."
Al-Tikriti says he knows Saddam's weapons are in Syria because of contingency plans established as far back as the late 1980s, in the event either Damascus or Baghdad were taken over.
"Not to mention, I have discussed this in-depth with various contacts of mine who have confirmed what I already knew," he said.
Saddam, after lying for so many years, knew the U.S. eventually would come for the weapons, he said, and wanted to maintain legitimacy with pan-Arab nationalists.
Also, he had "wanted since he took power to embarrass the West, and this was the perfect opportunity to do so," al-Tikriti said.
"After Saddam denied he had such weapons, why would he use them or leave them readily available to be found?" he said. "That would only legitimize President Bush, who he has a personal grudge against."
What we are witnessing now, he said, "is many who opposed the war to begin with are rallying around Saddam saying we overthrew a sovereign leader based on a lie about WMD. This is exactly what Saddam wanted and predicted."
Al-Tikriti said he turned against the Baath Party after his wife stood up to him and questioned his brutal tactics.
"This really made me think, because no one has ever even considered to question the tactics of myself or any others and lived to tell about it," he said. "This courageous move made me think deep and hard."
Al-Tikriti said he still maintains good sources inside and outside of Iraq.
"Some of Saddam's key scientists are personal friends of mine, as well as other key leaders in the former Iraqi military," he said. "I have helped draw information since my defecting to the United States government voluntarily and with the permission of these contacts. The only difference between many of them and I, is that I had the opportunity to defect and they didn't."
New evidence on Saddam's WMDs?
Duelfer: 'A lot of material left Iraq and went to Syria'
Is this one of Saddam's mobile bio-weapons labs?
Inspector: Saddam had WMD on 'short notice'
Saddam's WMD have been found
Secret intelligence memolinks Saddam, bin Laden
Thursday, February 16, 2006
Very important data grossly and conspicuously ignored by cover-Clintons'-ass(etts) 9-11 (c)Omission, headed by Jamie Groelick the very person responsible for erecting the infamous "wall" which prevented intelligence agenceis from communication with one another during Bill and Hillary's residency in the Oval Office.
Result ....... 9-11. Remember Clinton was offered bin Laden and turned him down flat. Voice print verified recording of Clinton at a speech admitting EXACTLY that.
To listen to President Clinton explain why he turned the Sudanese offer down, Click here.
http://www.newsmax.com/clinton2.mp3 (mp3 link working as of this posting)
Result .... declassifying top secret dual use technology sold to the Chinese Communist Party government. Sweet, huh?????? ...... and we wonder why China is economically and technologically rising as a world super power, also selling weapons and technology to Iran and other terrorist sponsoring states so they can be used on us both on the battlefield and on our own soil if given a chance.
Website devoted to Able Danger Hearings which will be updated at least daily if not more.
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Upon being reminded by this article I do remember 'Chicken Littles" running around in the 60's spreading gloom and doom about another ice age, also movies based on that theme just so they would scare the starch out of us like they're doing now with "Global Warming" and "Greenhouse Gasses."
The only greenhouse gasses causing problems are those being emitted by the "greens."
Must be a tough gig creating a a job, drawing a paycheck, based upon the amount of fear created by such a job.
Fact ..... the sun is burning warmer in its present cycle and that's why it's warmer on earth. Duuuuuh!!!
"The End Is Not Nigh?
By Hans H.J. Labohm 10 Feb 2006
Source Tech Central Station Daily
"British Prime Minister Tony Blair told a parliamentary committee earlier this month that the "world has seven years to take vital decisions and implement measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions or it could be too late… If we don't get the right agreement internationally for the period after which the Kyoto protocol will expire – that's in 2012 -- I think we are in serious trouble." Asked if the world had seven years to implement measures on climate change before the problem reached a "tipping point," Blair answered: "Yes."
This is the most recent and perhaps most dramatic in a long series statements by prominent politicians about the putative threat of man-made global warming. On what did Tony Blair base his alarming view? New scientific insights? Or on an unshakable secular faith, which seems to fill the vacuum left by the demise of traditional religion? I surmise the latter. Because in the field of science there seems to be some shift towards a more sober look at the climate issue, witness the numerous studies which appear in peer-reviewed journals, which are either explicitly critical of, or implicitly inconsistent with the man-made global warming hypothesis.
The ongoing discussion on the "hockey stick" graph -- a reconstruction of temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere between the years 1000 and 2000 -- offers a case in point. This debate entered a new phase when Steve McIntyre, one of the foremost hockey-stick critics, who had long been ignored, if not ostracized, by the global warming community, was officially invited by the National Research Council of The National Academies of the United States to participate in a special committee. This committee was requested to summarize the current scientific information on the temperature record over the past two millennia, describe the proxy records that have been used to reconstruct pre-instrumental climatic conditions, assess the methods employed to combine multiple proxy data over large spatial scales, evaluate the overall accuracy and precision of such reconstructions, and explain how central the debate over the paleoclimate temperature record is to the state of scientific knowledge on global climate change. It was exactly the mandate which Steve McIntyre had been advocating all along.
Politicians regard the studies by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as the ultimate climate bible. Unfortunately, they do not read the comprehensive reports which form the basis of the whole exercise. They only read -- if at all -- the alarmist passages in the "Summary for Policy-maker", which have been skewed through an elaborate and sophisticated process of spin-doctoring. Details of this practice have recently been revealed by the French climatologist Marcel Leroux in his book, Global Warming - Myth or Reality? The Erring Ways of Climatology.
Disapproving these practices, various renowned scientists have distanced themselves from the IPCC. In the US, Chris Landsea, a hurricane expert, is one example. In the Netherlands, Henk Tennekes, former director of the research department of the Royal Meteorological Institute, and Hans Oerlemans, glaciologist and laureate of the prestigious Spinoza Award, have done the same.
Political leaders assume that climate science is sufficiently advanced to legitimize all kinds of draconian measures which have a profound impact on our society and economy -- measures which, moreover, encroach upon the liberty of the individual citizen. But if we take a closer look, this appears not to be the case. Contrary what is often argued, there is no consensus among scientists on the man-made global warming hypothesis.
Ironically, just as global warming scare-mongering reaches new heights, the global cooling hypothesis is making a come back. It should be recalled that the frightening images of imminent global warming disaster are of fairly recent vintage. After all, in the 1960s and 1970s various prominent climatologists held the view that it was not global warming that formed a mortal threat to humanity but global cooling.
Recently the astronomer Khabibullo Abdusamatov of the Pulkovo Astronomic Observatory in St. Petersburg declared that the Earth will experience a "mini Ice Age" in the middle of this century, caused by low solar activity. Temperatures will begin falling six or seven years from now, when global warming caused by increased solar activity in the 20th century reaches its peak. The coldest period will occur 15 to 20 years after a major solar output decline between 2035 and 2045, Abdusamatov said. This view is shared by the Belgian astronomer, Dirk Callebaut, who expects a "grand minimum" in the middle of this century, just like the Maunder Minimum (1650-1700), a period during which the Thames, the Seine and the Dutch canals were frozen in winter.
If these astronomers are right, the hundreds of billions of dollars the world will spend every year on the fight against global warming will have gone down the drain. But, of course, we are not sure of imminent global cooling. On the other hand, we are not sure whether there will be catastrophic global warming either.
What to do in the face of this uncertainty? The earlier-mentioned climatologist, Henk Tennekes, recently argued in an interview in the most prominent Dutch weekly, Elsevier: "We only understand 10 percent of the climate issue. That is not enough to wreck the world economy with Kyoto-like measures."
Hans Labohm, co-author of Man-Made Global Warming: Unravelling a Dogma, recently became an expert reviewer for the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Missed this one a year ago.... picked up the reprint from link at bottom. A bit more about the UN.
"When in Rome, do as the Visigoths do
from The Daily Telegraph, February 15th 2005
"It's a good basic axiom that if you take a quart of ice-cream and a quart of dog faeces and mix 'em together the result will taste more like the latter than the former. That's the problem with the UN. If you make the free nations and the thug states members of the same club, the danger isn't that they'll meet each other half-way but that the free world winds up going three-quarters, seven-eighths of the way. Thus the Oil-for-Fraud scandal: in the end, Saddam Hussein had a much shrewder understanding of the way the UN works than Bush and Blair did.
And, of course, corrupt organisations rarely stop at just one kind. If you don't want to bulk up your pension by skimming the Oil-for-Food programme, don't worry, whatever your bag, the UN can find somewhere that suits - in West Africa, it's Sex-for-Food, with aid workers demanding sexual services from locals as young as four; in Cambodia, it's drug dealing; in Kenya, it's the refugee extortion racket; in the Balkans, sex slaves.
But you get the general picture: on a UN peace mission, everyone gets his piece. Didier Bourguet, a UN staffer in Congo and the Central African Republic, enjoyed the pleasures of 12-year-old girls, and as a result is now on trial in France. His lawyer has said he was part of a UN paedophile network that transcends national boundaries.
Now how about this? The Third Infantry Division are raping nine-year olds in Ramadi. Ready, set, go! That thundering sound outside your window isn't the new IKEA sale, but the great herd of BBC/CNN/Independent/Guardian/New York Times/Le Monde/Sydney Morning Herald/Irish Times/Cork Examiner reporters stampeding to the Sunni Triangle. Whoa, hold up, lads, it's only hypothetical.
But think about it: the merest glimpse of a freaky West Virginia tramp leading an Abu Ghraib inmate around with girlie knickers on his head was enough to prompt calls for Rumsfeld's resignation, and for Ted Kennedy to charge that Saddam's torture chambers were now open "under new management", and for Robert Fisk to be driven into the kind of orgasmic frenzy unseen since his column on how much he enjoyed being beaten up by an Afghan mob: "Just look at the way US army reservist Lynndie England holds the leash of the naked, bearded Iraqi," wrote Fisk. "No sadistic movie could outdo the damage of this image. In September 2001, the planes smashed into the buildings; today, Lynndie smashes to pieces our entire morality with just one tug on the leash."
Who's straining at the leash here? Down, boy. But, if Lynndie's smashed to pieces our entire morality with just one tug, Bush's Zionist neocons getting it on with Congolese kindergarteners would have the Independent calling for US expulsion from the UN - no, wait, from Planet Earth: slice it off from Maine to Hawaii and use one of those new Euro-Airbuses to drag it out round the back of Uranus.
But systemic UN child sex in at least 50 per cent of their missions? The transnational morality set can barely stifle their yawns. If you're going to rape prepubescent girls, make sure you're wearing a blue helmet.
And at least the Pentagon put a stop to Abu Ghraib. As a UN official in Congo told the Telegraph yesterday: "The crux of the problem is that if the UN gets bolshie with these governments then they stop providing the UN with troops and staff."
And the problem with that is?
In Congo, the UN has now forbidden all contact between its forces and the natives. The rest of the world should be so lucky.
I take it from his use of "bolshie" that the quoted UN wallah is British. If so, that's the system in a nutshell: when a British bigwig is with British forces, he'll enforce British standards; when a British official is holed up with an impeccably "multilateral" force of Uruguayans, Tunisians, etc, he's more circumspect. When in Rome, do as the Visigoths do.
The child sex racket is only the most extreme example of what's wrong with the UN approach to the world. Developed peoples value resilience: when disaster strikes, you bounce back. A hurricane flattens Florida, you patch things up and reopen. As the New Colonial Class, the UN doesn't look at it like that: when disaster strikes, it just proves you and your countrymen are children who need to be taken under the transnational wing.
The folks that have been under the UN wing the longest - indeed, the only ones with their own permanent UN agency and semi-centenarian "refugee camps" - are the most comprehensively wrecked people on the face of the earth: the Palestinians. UN territories like Kosovo are the global equivalent of inner-city council estates with the blue helmets as local enforcers for the absentee slum landlord. By contrast, a couple of years after imperialist warmonger Bush showed up, Afghanistan and Iraq have elections, presidents and prime ministers.
When the tsunami hit, hundreds of thousands of people died within minutes. The Australians and Americans arrived within hours. The UN was unable to get to Banda Aceh within weeks.Instead, the humanitarian fat cats were back in New York and Geneva holding press conferences warning about post-tsunami health consequences - dysentery, cholera, BSE from water-logged cattle, etc - that, they assured us, would kill as many people as the original disaster. But it never happened, any more than did their predictions of disaster for Iraq ("The head of the World Food Programme has warned that Iraq could spiral into a massive humanitarian disaster") or Afghanistan ("The UN Children's Fund has estimated that as many as 100,000 Afghan children could die of cold, disease and hunger").It's one thing to invent humanitarian disasters to disparage Bush's unilateralist warmongering, but a month ago the UN was reduced to inventing a humanitarian disaster in order to distract attention from the existing humanitarian disaster it wasn't doing anything about.
All this derives from a UN culture in which the free nations have met the thug states so much more than half way that they now largely share the dictators' view of their peoples - as either helpless children who need every decision made for them, or a bunch of dupes whose national wealth you can reroute to your Swiss bank account, or a never-ending source of fresh meat. Those British officials trying to rationalise Oil-for-Fraud or child sex rings give the game away: it's not just the underage Congolese girls who get corrupted by contact with the UN. "
Monday, February 13, 2006
"Communist Regime Bans People Under 18 From Attending Mosques in Xinjiang, China
Source The Epoch Times
"When it comes to violation of religious freedom in China, the plight of Christians has generated the greatest international concern. Persecution of the Islamic Uighurs is rarely reported in the free press.
According to a Uighur who preferred not to be named, since the September 11 attack on the Twin Towers, the Chinese communist regime has wantonly violated the religious freedom of Uighurs under the pretext of countering terrorism and religious extremism.
One tactic of the communist regime is to prohibit people below the age of 18 from entering the mosque in Xinjiang. The measure fundamentally severs the Uighurs from Islam and is a serious violation of their religious freedom.
The regime also requires the Ahung (or Imam) of the Xinjiang mosque to make a daily report on the attendance of the people who come for prayers, including their numbers, ages, gender, and whether they are cadres. Such monitoring by the Ahung generates anxiety among Uighurs and creates a split between the Ahung and the believers.
The term Ahung comes from the Persian language. It is used to address the Islamic religious teachers in Persian-speaking regions. In China, this term refers to religious personnel who serve in the mosque and is equivalent to the clergymen in the Christian church.
The Communist regime also restricts Islamic books, including the Koran, from entering Xinjiang. The regime also prohibits its party members and cadres from believing in Islam and from entering mosques.
The Uighur interviewed feels that such regulations are completely irrational. Even though party members and cadres cannot openly practice Islam, they can still follow the religion in their hearts, and no one can stop them from praying at home.
The communist regime also has a discriminatory regulation against Uighur female students wearing head scarves in school. The Uighur individual feels that such a regulation is irrational and also insensitive to the climate in Xinjiang, which has sandstorms. Also offensive is the construction of large-scale grape wine breweries in Xinjiang, despite the fact that Islam prohibits alcohol.
Based on official statistics, Xinjiang has more than eight million Uighurs. However, the Uighur interviewee points out that the actual number of Uighurs is nearly ten million. The majority live in Nanjiang, where they lead hard lives. Most of the Uighurs believe in Islam. The Kazaks, who are the ethnic minority in Xinjiang, also believe in Islam.
Our interviewee points out that the communist regime has different policies in dealing with the Uighur and the Hui Muslims. The regime's suppression of Uighurs is especially severe and will only produce resistance.
Jia Qinglin, Chairman of the Standing Committee Member of the CCP's Central Political Bureau, conducted a seminar with heads of religious groups in Beijing on January 22, 2006, before the Chinese New Year. At the session, Jia Qinglin spoke of the importance of resisting foreign forces that use religion to infiltrate the country. Apparently this reflects the regime's intention to continue to violate the religious freedom of people in China. "
Monday, February 13, 2006
"Al Gore Event Funded by Bin Laden's Family
"The Saudi Arabia seminar that was addressed by former Vice President Al Gore over the weekend in a speech that criticized the U.S. for being too tough on Arabs was sponsored, in part, by Osama bin Laden's family.
On Saturday, the state-run Saudi news outlet Arab News reported that the Jeddah Economic Forum, where Gore spoke, was funded by "Saudi Arabian Airlines, the Saudi Binladin Group, Gulf One Investment Bank, Saudi Basic Industries Corp." and an array of other big companies with ties to the Middle East.
The Saudi BinLadin Group - which is Saudi Arabia's largest construction company - is run by Osama bin Laden's brothers and cousins. Jeddah, the site of the forum attended by Gore, is Osama bin Laden's hometown.
Although family members claim they've disowned bin Laden, his mother told reporters after the 9/11 attacks that she received advanced warning from him that something big was about to happen.
A wealthy bin Laden niece also reportedly abandoned her lower Manhattan apartment three weeks before the 9/11 attacks.
The BinLadin Group's longtime involvement in the Jeddah forum has been widely reported in the Mideast and European press.
In January 2002, ex-President Clinton addressed the JEF, which paid him $267,000 for his speech. According to London's Financial Times:
"The conference was dominated by the Saudis' desire to overcome the pressures of September 11 and strengthen U.S.-Saudi ties . . . The BinLadin Group, one of the forum's backers, has been battered by its association with Osama."
Other JEF speakers that year included President Bush's younger brother, Neil.
It's not known whether - or how much - Mr. Gore was paid for his speech."
Monday, February 13, 2006
To my dog(s): How do I love thee?
Let me count the ways...
1. I love thee agreeably - enough to let your stinky doghide on the bed after a run through damp eaves, mud and slug infested gardens.
2. I love thee steadfastly - enough to devote a year to raising you from a wobbly speck into a strong healthy adult (who promptly attempts to seize control).
3. I love thee passionately - despite your repeated efforts to probe my ears, eyes and mouth with the same tongue you use for various other atrocities.
4. I love thee well - despite the amazing odors you produce.
5. I love thee deeply - though you use me as a napkin at every opportunity.
6. I love thee madly - despite the various bodily functions you have performed at inappropriate moments - in inappropriate places.
7. I love thee constantly - despite the dog "bladder curfew" I have lived by for many years.
8. I love thee truly - despite the "doggie landmines" hidden in the grass.
9. I love thee absolutely - because you never (well, hardly ever) hog the remote control.
10. I love thee gratefully - because you stay by my side (or on my side).
11. I love thee devotedly - more than clean carpeting, clothing, furniture, floors or walls.
12. I love thee bravely - enough to battle the indomitable flea on your behalf.
13. I love thee monetarily - enough to put the vet's children through college.
14. I love thee openly - I will bear any embarrassment for your furry sake.
15. I love thee totally - more than free time, excess cash or a predictable life.
Monday, February 13, 2006
Gore grovels before Saudis, apologizing for America.
From Powerlineblog.com .... an outstanding, recommended read .....
"Al of Arabia
Monday, February 13, 2006
The left is the left is the left ad infinitum.
"A disgraceful art exhibit in Milan has illustrated once again the deep affinity between the Left and the forces of the global jihad. In these days of Muslims the world over calling for the deaths of those who have “insulted Islam,” anyone who wants to see Oriana Fallaci beheaded need look no further than the Galleria Luciano Inga-Pin in Milan, which is exhibiting Giuseppe Veneziano’s “American Beauty” from January 19 through March 18. This is a series of paintings designed to highlight the “weakness and perversity of the ‘American way of life.’” It accordingly features straightforward, if somewhat lurid, portraits of Michael Jackson and Ronald McDonald, along with the distinctly non-American Harry Potter. Then comes a bizarre depiction of a nude man having sexual intercourse with the Pink Panther, five artistic renditions of the Abu Ghraib prison photos (each with “American Beauty” scrawled across the top), and — Oriana Fallaci’s decapitated head.
Although I find the picture of Fallaci decapitated deeply offensive, I have no plans to attack the Italian embassy, boycott Italian wine, phone in a bomb threat to the Galleria Luciano Inga-Pin, kill innocent people who had nothing to with the painting, or threaten to kill those who are actually responsible for it. Veneziano’s painting is the sort of obnoxiousness that has become commonplace on the Left, and is one of the prices of freedom of speech.
Veneziano’s painting is doubly offensive, however, in light of the fact that Fallaci herself has been driven out of Italy by frivolous charges that she has “defamed Islam.” Giuseppe Veneziano is not on trial for depicting Fallaci decapitated, but Fallaci faces trial for making a series of heated but largely true statements about Islam and Muslims. Veneziano’s painting is triply offensive in that it depicts exactly what the Muslim exponents of cartoon rage around the world would like to see done to Fallaci — and thus manifests the ever-closer empathy between the Western Left and Islamic jihad. “Behead those who insult Islam,” read a sign at a recent demonstration in London protesting the Danish cartoons of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. If Fallaci has insulted Islam with her monumental post-9/11 cries of freedom and resistance, The Rage and the Pride and The Force of Reason, Giuseppe Veneziano is happy to oblige the mujahedin, at least on canvas.
In 2006 in Milan the prospect of Fallaci decapitata evokes not so much the iconic Leftist images of the Bastille, Robespierre, and the Terror, but Daniel Pearl, Nick Berg, and the Jihad — particularly in light of the subject matter that has earned the great lady so many enemies in Italy and around the world. This should come as no surprise. Both the Left and the mujahedin envision a totalitarian state that cleanses the world of evil by force, establishing a just society at the price of an unspecified number of dead. Both are advocates of a supremacist ideology that is immune to self-criticism and unable to tolerate criticism from others. And now as the European Union contemplates new laws that will, in the words of Franco Frattini, who bears the Orwellian designation of EU Commissioner for Justice, Freedom, and Security, “give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression,” the marriage of the European Left and Islamic jihad can proceed all the more speedily. Frattini has since denied that the EU has any such plans, but there can be no denying that voices all over the West have called for the media to exercise “responsible self-regulation” so as to avoid trampling upon Muslim sensibilities. But Muslim sensibilities only: those who depict Fallaci beheaded, or Jesus Christ with the face of Osama bin Laden, will continue to be subject to the same protections enunciated by Josh Wainwright, the producer of the art show that featured the Christ/Osama painting: “I don’t think it’s anyone’s job or vocation to limit the expression of artists.” Right. Except cartoon artists, of course. Or at least those who have the temerity to suggest that there might be some connection between violent actions done by Islamic jihadists and the Prophet who said that “Paradise is under the shades of swords.”
Fallaci decapitata may therefore end up being something far beyond what Giuseppe Veneziano intended, which doesn’t seem to have been more than an adolescent poke-in-the-eye to someone the Left hates and fears. His painting is a fitting emblem for the new Europe, the Europe in which the Swedish government closed down a political party’s website for displaying the cartoons of Muhammad, the Norwegian editor who ran the cartoons abjectly apologized, and European companies doing business in the Middle East can’t dissociate themselves quickly enough from Denmark and the cartoons of shame. This is the New Europe, the New Dhimmi Europe, the Europe that is eager to “give the Muslim world the message: We are aware of the consequences of exercising the right of free expression.”
Oh, Europe is already well aware of those consequences. The consequences are crystal clear in Giuseppe Veneziano’s painting of Oriana Fallaci’s severed head. Not enough of those in Europe who still have their heads seem willing to stand up to Islamic violence and intimidation long enough to allow the heroic lady to keep hers. All around the Continent the parliamentary heads of government are losing their heads trying to avoid offending Islam; all too soon they will realize that Fallaci’s head alone was not enough to appease their sworn enemies. Not nearly enough.
Click Here to support Frontpagemag.com.
Monday, February 13, 2006
Somehow our own lefties could be inserted into this article with their hair-on-fire determination to remove the 10 Commandments from court houses, prohibition of Nativity scenes, etc..... while creating a postage stamp tribute to Islam after 9-11.
Were we not in America which has some freedoms remaining intact, we'd probably see full scale parallel destruction of our own icons held sacred since our nation's inception..... just like the left's ideological clones did when communinsm spread through China and Russia. Those of us who are old enough know the drill.
"The New Iconoclasts
By Lee Harris
Source Tech Central Station Daily
"The word iconoclast, when it is used nowadays, most often refers to a person who "attacks established beliefs, ideals, customs, or institution," as Webster's Third puts it -- a definition that turns the iconoclast into a cultural rebel or a free thinker, an individual willing to buck the establishment.
By this standard, the Danish cartoonist who drew the controversial caricatures of Mohammed was an iconoclast in our modern sense, and was simply doing what many cartoonists have done before him, using his gifts to poke fun at sacred cows. True, the sacred cow, in this case, was the Prophet Mohammed, revered by millions of Muslims across the globe. Yet the artists who created the popular TV series South Park routinely represent the figure of Jesus in all manner of mocking ways -- in one episode, Jesus was portrayed in boxing shorts, fighting a grudge match against Satan. No doubt many Southern Baptists were offended by such a caricature. Yet none of them rioted about it.
Here in the contemporary West, for better or worse, there is no cow so sacred that it cannot be made sport of on national television, let alone in cartoons in small scale periodicals. We may regret this or we may rejoice over it, but in either case, we must recognize that the role of the court jester has been valuable in the West precisely because the court jester is permitted to remind the king that he is only human -- and what a useful function that can serve. Thus, parody is a prophylactic against pomposity -- though it is equally serviceable as a collective defense mechanism against fanaticism.
The fanatic is the man who will not allow you to poke fun at his particular sacred cow. He takes his creed so seriously that he refuses to permit anyone else to treat it as a subject for humor or levity.
The topic of fanaticism, however, takes us back to the original meaning of the word iconoclasm, a Greek word that literally means the shattering or destruction of an image, either a visual image, like the icons beloved by Greek Orthodoxy, or the kind of statues that were admired by Roman Catholics. Here the iconoclast is not creating an image designed to provoke irreverence, the way a cartoonist does, but he is intent on eliminating all offensive images completely and totally.
There were two great iconoclastic movements that shook the Byzantine Empire, first in the eighth century, and later in the ninth century, both of which exhibited the same fanatic zeal in destroying the thousands of icons that adorned Byzantine churches and monasteries. Why? Because the Byzantine iconoclasts argued that what were regarded by many as beautiful artistic treasures were in fact acts of sacrilege and blasphemy. They were not to be removed from the churches and monasteries, in order to be carefully preserved in a museum, as a government of zealous atheists might do -- no, they were to be destroyed root and branch.
Many modern historians have argued that the outbreak of Byzantine iconoclasm in the eighth century was the result of the expansion of the intensely iconoclastic Arab conquerors that had occurred in the previous century -- an expansion that gobbled up large chunks of the Byzantine Empire in what is now Syria. For the Arabs, however, it was not enough merely to destroy the sacred icons of Greek orthodoxy -- for them, all pictorial representation was forbidden. You could not draw a man or a pea or a cat, nor could you make statues of them -- and any drawings or statues of them you came across had to be immediately destroyed.
The Protestant Reformers, who were also iconoclasts, were less severe. They simply wanted to obliterate any image of the Virgin Mary or of the Catholic Saints that they did not themselves accept -- and here again, not even a thought was given to the idea of sparing the item due to historical or artistic value.
Wherever iconoclasts triumphed, they did not rest content until they had destroyed all the images that they found to be sacrilegious -- what we in the modern West automatically regard as harmless art, the iconoclasts see as hideous blasphemy; and while to us a "mere" cartoon can be amusing or disgusting, none of us would wish to see every image of it effaced from the earth. We would preserve it simply because of its documentary value, if for no other reason. That is why the iconoclast is, by definition, a fanatic. He feels he has a mission to destroy all the images that he holds to be against his fanatical creed. All must perish.
It has been almost half a millennium since the last outbreak of iconoclastic fanaticism in the West. Yet if you try to discover a republication of the Danish cartoons on the reputable Internet sites, you will discover that they are not being posted. CNN on line noted that they would not be showing the cartoons "out of respect for Islam." Nor does CNN's stance seem to be exceptional. Meanwhile, profuse apologies are being offered to the Muslim world by men who had nothing whatsoever to do with either the creation or the publication of the cartoons, and who are denouncing the cartoons for being…cartoons.
In short, the new iconoclasts are winning -- they are realizing that they have the power to make us suppress any image that they find disagreeable to their stern and mirthless fanaticism -- even if it is just a funny cartoon in a paper published in a cold corner of Europe, far far from Mecca.
Either Muslims need to begin to get a sense of humor, or we need to became a great deal more serious. "
Lee Harris is author of Civilization and It Enemies.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
A very cheap shot from a very small person attempting to re-write history. Maybe he feels our memories are as thin as his appear. Let's see, he precipitated the situation we have in the Middle East right now with how he failed to handle Iran correctly and he gave away the Panama Canal the US built ....... which is owned now by Hutchison Whampoa which has very close ties to the communist Chinese government, and further never met a leftist dictator he didn't buddy up to.
Carter allowed surveillance in 1977
By Charles Hurt
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
February 11, 2006
" Former President Jimmy Carter, who publicly rebuked President Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program this week during the funeral of Coretta Scott King and at a campaign event, used similar surveillance against suspected spies.
"Under the Bush administration, there's been a disgraceful and illegal decision -- we're not going to the let the judges or the Congress or anyone else know that we're spying on the American people," Mr. Carter said Monday in Nevada when his son Jack announced his Senate campaign.
"And no one knows how many innocent Americans have had their privacy violated under this secret act," he said.
The next day at Mrs. King's high-profile funeral, Mr. Carter evoked a comparison to the Bush policy when referring to the "secret government wiretapping" of civil rights leader Martin Luther King.
But in 1977, Mr. Carter and his attorney general, Griffin B. Bell, authorized warrantless electronic surveillance used in the conviction of two men for spying on behalf of Vietnam.
The men, Truong Dinh Hung and Ronald Louis Humphrey, challenged their espionage convictions to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, which unanimously ruled that the warrantless searches did not violate the men's rights.
In its opinion, the court said the executive branch has the "inherent authority" to wiretap enemies such as terror plotters and is excused from obtaining warrants when surveillance is "conducted 'primarily' for foreign intelligence reasons."
That description, some Republicans say, perfectly fits the Bush administration's program to monitor calls from terror-linked people to the U.S.
The Truong case, however, involved surveillance that began in 1977, before the enactment of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which established a secret court for granting foreign intelligence warrants.
Democrats and some Republicans in Congress say FISA guidelines, approved in 1978 when Mr. Carter was president, are the only way the president may conduct surveillance on U.S. soil.
Administration officials say the president has constitutional authority to conduct surveillance without warrants in the name of national security. The only way Congress could legitimately curtail that authority, they argue, is through an amendment to the Constitution.
The administration's view has been shared by previous Democrat administrations, including Mr. Carter's. " .......... continued
Friday, February 10, 2006
Senator Frist's Survey.
"PLEASE COMPLETE MY BORDER SECURITY AND IMMIGRATION SURVEY!
Welcome to our Survey Center.
This section of our website, the Legislative Priorities Project, is your chance to tell us what your priorities are for President Bush’s Second Term and your Republican Majority in Congress.
We will be adding new sets of survey questions regularly. Our goal, using the VOLPAC website and a direct mail campaign, is to register the opinions of over 1,000,000 Americans.
So please take a moment to complete this week’s questions on border security and immigration and then return soon to answer a new set of questions.
Help make a difference!
Thank you for your time.
- Bill Frist, M.D.
Senate Majority Leader
Thursday, February 9, 2006
A fertilizer factory still smells the same as one by any other PC name.
To listen to President Clinton explain why he turned the Sudanese offer down, Click here.
http://www.newsmax.com/clinton2.mp3 (mp3 link working as of this posting)
Hillary Clinton Criticizes Bush For Failing To Catch Bin Laden...
"Clinton blasts Bush on war
The NY senator speaks out against administration’s war on terror, urges Dems to challenge GOP
" WASHINGTON -- Ignoring GOP criticism that she's too angry for prime time, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton Wednesday walloped Karl Rove and President George W. Bush for "playing the fear card" on terrorism and for failing to kill "the tallest man in Afghanistan," Osama bin Laden.
Clinton exhorted Democrats to challenge the administration on Iraq, Afghanistan and the war on terror, while seeming to bemoan the failure of former Democratic presidential candidates John Kerry and Al Gore to overcome claims that they were soft on defense.
"We've lost two elections and we lost them on the issue of security," Clinton told the United Auto Workers convention in Washington. Republicans "are doing it to us again," she said.".....
"Prosecutors Eyed bin Laden Before Clinton Let Him Go In 1996, when President Clinton refused Sudan's offer to extradite Osama bin Laden to America, federal prosecutors had already publicly identified the 9/11 mastermind as an unindicted co-conspirator in a radical Islamist plot to blow up New York City landmarks.
Bin Laden's known ties to the terror cell that would later be implicated in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center stands in marked contrast to the ex-president's claim that when he turned the Sudanese offer down, bin Laden had committed no crime against the U.S.
"At the time, 1996, he had committed no crime against America," Clinton insisted in a 2002 speech to a New York business group. "So I did not bring him here because we had no basis on which to hold him, though we knew he wanted to commit crimes against America."
But reports published before March 1996, when the Sudanese tried to hand the top terrorist over, show that the ex-president did indeed have a legal basis to bring him to America and at least hold him, with an eye toward putting him on trial.
On April 21, 1995, USA Today reported:
"One of the most notorious patrons of Sudan's terrorist camps is Osama Bin Laden, a wealthy Saudi Arabian. He was named by federal prosecutors in New York as a potential co-conspirator in the terror trial of radical Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman and 10 other Muslims accusing of plotting a 'war of urban terrorism' in the USA."
Mohammed Jamal Khalifah, better known as "bin Laden's banker," was also named an unindicted co-conspirator who financed Ramzi Yousef's plot to destroy the World Trade Center in 1993, according to a November 1995 report in U.S. News & World Report.
Six Americans died in the '93 attack, with over 1,000 injured.
Five months before Sudan offered to turn bin Laden over to Clinton, the 9/11 mastermind helped carry out another terrorist attack that killed five Americans.
On Nov. 27, 1995, U.S. News reported, "At 11:40 a.m. last Monday, dozens of Americans sat eating lunch in a downtown Riyadh snack bar in a building that housed a U.S.-run military training center for the Saudi National Guard. Suddenly, a van packed with explosives erupted outside. Another explosion followed seconds later. When the dust settled, six people were dead and 60 injured, most of them Americans."
The final death toll rose to seven, with two Indians among those killed.
Four Saudis later confessed to the crime, naming bin Laden as their leader.
In 2001, PBS's "Frontline" chronicled what the U.S. knew about bin Laden before the 9/11 attacks. According to PBS, prior to Sudan's March 1996 offer to turn the wealthy Saudi over, bin Laden had been implicated in the following terrorist activity:
"February/March 1995 - Ramzi Yousef, mastermind of the World Trade Center bombing, is captured in Pakistan and extradited to the United States. A search of his former residences leads investigators to believe he is financially linked to bin Laden. Also, he had stayed at a bin Laden-financed guest house while in Pakistan.
"June 1995 - Unsuccessful assassination attempt on the life of the President of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, in Addis Ababa. U.S. intelligence sources believe bin Laden was somehow linked.
"August 1995 - Bin Laden wrote an open letter to King Fahd of Saudi Arabia calling for a campaign of guerrilla attacks in order to drive U.S forces out of the kingdom.
"November 13, 1995 - Five Americans and two Indians are killed in the truck bombing of a US-operated Saudi National Guard training center in Riyadh. Bin Laden denies involvement but praises the attack.
"Spring 1996 - President Clinton signed a top secret order that authorized the CIA to use any and all means to destroy bin Laden's network." [End of Excerpt]
On Tuesday the Independent Commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks said there was "no reliable evidence" to contradict denials from Clinton administration officials that Sudan ever offered bin Laden to the U.S. The Commission did not explain why President Clinton's own admission that the offer was real was not considered "reliable evidence."
To listen to President Clinton explain why he turned the Sudanese offer down, Click here. http://www.newsmax.com/clinton2.mp3 (mp3 link working as of this posting)
Thursday, February 9, 2006
This is the organization to which Democrats fully intend to subjugate authority of the US government.
Let's see we have these following revelations plus a deepening "Oil For Food" money pipeline which flowed straight through the UN.
Also very recently the UN had a day of solidarity with the Palestinians in which a map of Palestine was displayed as a backdrop in which there was NO Israel. Israel's territory was within and delegated as Palestine.
Mistake, many don't think so ..... just seems the UN's real intent is beaming through in flashing neon.
"Israel wiped off the mapon UN 'Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People,' November 29, 2005
at the UN
Statement of the Secretary-General on the Middle EastDevelopment
Not less than two weeks after commemorating the deaths of Jews sixty years ago, Secretary-General Kofi Annan is back to UN business as usual - condemning Jews of today for defending themselves against a mortal threat. He ignores international law and plays to his regular political constituency - the undemocratic UN majority
. (AB) more
"Defending the Indefensible
By Ted Lapkin
February 6, 2006
"What will it take to knock the United Nations off the pedestal that it occupies in the minds of American internationalists? Certainly not passivity in the face of genocide. The loathsome record of the UN fiddling while innocents burn in Bosnia, Rwanda and now Darfur has not dimmed the affections of the world body’s faithful devotees.
Nor do serial rape and institutionalised paedophilia seem to serve as disqualifiers, either. The multi-lateralist faith of the UN cheerleading squad appears to be unshaken by a sordid trail of sexual exploitation left by blue-helmeted peacekeepers from Kosovo to the Congo.
In 2001, a study by Save the Children revealed that United Nations missions throughout the world were plagued by epidemic levels of lecherous coercion. The NGO found that impoverished war refugees in West Africa and the Balkans were routinely pressured by UN staffers into trading fellatio for food.
In some instances, 12-year-old girls were forced to pay an excruciating price for survival by becoming the sexual playthings of United Nations personnel. Last September, Frenchman Didier Bourget testified at his rape trial in Paris that he organised underground child molestation networks while serving with several UN missions.
One might naturally expect that such stomach turning revelations would bring in train a slew of criminal prosecutions. Think again.
During the 1990s, the top United Nations official in Cambodia responded to similar revelations of rampant lascivious misbehaviour by his staff with the quip: “boys will be boys.” And this same instinct to cover up, rather than ferret out, has governed the UN’s institutional reaction to subsequent instances of salacious delinquency.
Adverse publicity and American political pressure finally moved the United Nations to announce a policy of “zero tolerance” towards sexual abuse in 2003. But like much of the rhetoric emanating from UN Headquarters, this was a toothless declaration that had zero effect on the scourge of prurient peacekeeping. The repute of the world body was besmirched yet further in 2005 by new reports of debauchery at missions in Burundi, Haiti, Liberia and above all the Congo.
The United Nations Association of the USA (UNA-USA) is an outspoken proponent of the internationalist perspective in the debate over Washington’s stance on foreign affairs. Yet while the UNA-USA proudly proclaims its devotion the task of “providing information and educational materials,” its policy statements are much more notable for what they omit than what they contain.
The Association’s website abounds with bien pensant denunciations of Bush administration foreign policy. But the UNA-USA has refrained from any statement that would decry the sexual depravity that has marred so many United Nations operations.
The Spring 2005 issue of the UNA-USA’s quarterly magazine, Interdependent, features a puff piece interview with the United Nations Undersecretary for Peacekeeping Operations. But nowhere on the website version of this article is there any mention of blue-beret-wearing sexual predators who prey on the vulnerable victims of war throughout the globe.
This ‘business as usual’ attitude at the UNA-USA has been completely unaffected by the serial prostitution of children that has taken place on the watch of the United Nations. Legislation introduced last year into congress would have made further US support for peacekeeping operations contingent on the UN’s adoption of an effective code of conduct. But the Association urged its members to lobby against the United Nations Reform Act of 2005.
Thus the UN’s dereliction of duty abroad is matched by the moral purblindness of its apologists at home. In their passion to redeem the virtues of the internationalist theory, defenders of the United Nations tend to extenuate the vices that condemn the world body to practical impotence.
The seeds of corruption that infect the UN derive from an ethos of moral relativism that equates neutrality with righteousness. And this philosophy of impartiality promotes an aversion to ethical value judgements that renders the United Nations unable to make any practical distinction between liberty and tyranny.
Within the corridors of the UN there is no difference in status between democratic governments that rule by the ballot and despotic juntas that rule by the bullet. And through the abdication of universal moral standards, the United Nation’s internal institutional logic compels the adoption of policies that reduce it to the status of global laughing stock.
The result is a world body that cannot even define terrorism, much less address it. We witness such absurdities as a Human Rights Commission that is chaired by paragons of inhumanity such as Libya. And the General Assembly serves as a theatre of the absurd in which tyrants attempt to deflect attention from their crimes by lecturing free nations on political ethics.
The United Nations pollutes itself through its assertion of parity between fascism and freedom. As long as it confers equal status on Robert Mugabe and George Bush alike, then the UN will continue its slide into the abyss of irrelevance.
Yet deliverance might still possible, but only if the democratic world has the courage to be cruel to be kind. The moral relativism that pervades the United Nations must go, and the body’s most unsavoury members must go with it.
Article 6 of the UN Charter provides for the ejection of nations that systematically violate its terms. But this provision of the Charter also contains a catch-22 that requires the approval of both the Security Council and General Assembly before a miscreant can be expelled. And of course, the third-world thugs who run the UN through sheer numbers will never permit their diplomatic playground to be turned against them: at least not as things now stand.
But what if America – the UN’s largest single dues payer – were to make its continued financial largess contingent upon a cleansing of the Augean Stable that the world body has become? Even the most recalcitrant United Nations bureaucrats could not fail to be moved by prospect of Washington keeping a firm hand on the wallet that dispenses 25% of their annual budget.
Such tough American tactics would doubtless cause the UNA-USA to scream bloody murder. But the UN must develop the ability to differentiate between slavery and sovereignty if it ever wishes to shed the taint of tolerance for tyranny that warps its institutional value system.
The overwhelming majority of Americans will never apologise for their belief that representative democracy is morally superior to repressive autocracy. Nor should they. But only when United Nations recognises, and acts upon, this self-evident truth, will the internationalist creed be saved from its own excesses.
Ted Lapkin was Communications Director for former Republican Congressman Rick Lazio. He now lives in Melbourne, Australia and is Director of Policy Analysis at the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council.
Thursday, February 9, 2006
Another classless, tasteless, grotesque, cheap shot from the left which mortified anyone with any sort of upbringinging.
Seems that self respect, respect for the memory of a great person they were supposed to be paying tribute to has gone to in a handbasket.
However, one thing Carter "forgot" to mention is that it was a Democratic presidency, Kennedy, and a Kennedy (Robert) who ordered wiretapping of Martin Luther King because of his close friendship with a known communist.
Changes the focus a bit when things are placed in proper context instead of re-writing history to suit purposes of the moment. Treating us like mushrooms again ......
By Lee Harris
"Mark Antony in his famous funeral oration in Shakespeare's Julius Caesar says that he came not to praise Caesar, but to bury him. This week, at the funeral for the widow of Dr. Martin Luther King, two of the speakers, Jimmy Carter and Rev. Joseph Lowery, might have opened their remarks by saying that they came not to bury Coretta Scott King, but to bash Bush, which is exactly what they proceeded to do. They exploited a solemn occasion in order to take cheap pot shots at the President, keenly aware that their remarks would be broadcast around the world, and into many American classrooms.
Of course, both Carter and Lowery were also aware that the target of their attack, George W. Bush, was sitting right behind them. Had he not been present on the occasion, their Bush-bashing would have only been an affront to good taste. But because Bush had come there to honor the memory of Coretta Scott King, and not to engage in a debate with his political opponents, the attacks on him crossed the boundaries of mere bad taste, and became low blows. They were deliberately attacking a man who they knew could not, under the circumstances, defend himself against their assault. Their aim was quite obvious -- to embarrass and humiliate Bush in the full knowledge that there was not a thing Bush could decently do about it.
The President, for example, could not do what most people, including myself, would have done. He could not jump up and simply walk out -- that would have created a scandal. Therefore, he had no choice but to sit there and take it. He was hopelessly trapped, and was entirely at the mercy of his assailants -- and they knew it. He had to behave like the President, even when a former President, Mr. Carter, was behaving like a cad.
Carter, for example, used the opportunity to insinuate that Bush's "domestic spying" was like the spying done by the FBI on Dr. King. Carter commiserated with the King family for having been subjected to such an ordeal at the hands of their government, and, by implication, he also commiserated with those Americans who had been subjected to Bush's domestic surveillance. But does this analogy honor the memory of Dr. King and his movement?
Let's make a simple thought experiment to find out.
Suppose al-Qaeda had decided to air its grievances against the United States by holding a massive peaceful "sit in" at the Twin Towers on 9/11. Suppose Islamic terrorists, instead of blowing up innocent human beings, had vowed only to use civil disobedience. Suppose Osama bin Laden, like Dr. King, had struggled with all his might to keep his organization from turning to bloodshed and violence. Would Bush have felt the need to launch a domestic surveillance program on such a pacifistic movement? Maybe; maybe not. But the fact that al-Qaeda embraces violence and celebrates terrorism -- doesn't this small detail destroy the basis of Carter's analogy? If you can equate bin Laden with Martin Luther King, and al-Qaeda to King's non-violent movement, then, by all means, go ahead and draw the same analogy that Mr. Carter drew about Bush's domestic surveillance program. If, on the other hand, you cannot equate the two, then Carter's analogy becomes at best ridiculous and at worst obscene.
The Soviets under Stalin were famous for their "show" trials -- trials that were put on not in order to judge a man's innocence or guilt -- since the verdict of "guilty" was always a foregone conclusion -- but simply as an exercise in propaganda. Bush critics have managed to devise a new ploy -- a "show" funeral, in which, instead of properly honoring the memory of the dead, the occasion is deliberately exploited for its propaganda value.
Shame on them.
Lee Harris is author of Civilization and Its Enemies.
Thursday, February 9, 2006
"Bush to Detail 2002 Attack Plot in Speech
"In a scheduled speech Thursday about the war on terror, President Bush will focus on a foiled attack in 2002 in which plotters planned to use hijacked commercial airplanes to strike the West Coast. ........
......... "Three targets cited were in the United States, including plans to use hijacked airplanes to attack the West Coast in mid-2002 and the East Coast in mid-2003. The White House said at least one planner of the West Coast attack was a key figure behind the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on Sept. 11, 2001."
Wednesday, February 8, 2006
"Ex-Officer Spurned on WMD Claim
By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
February 8, 2006
"A former special investigator for the Pentagon during the Iraq war said he found four sealed underground bunkers in southern Iraq that he is sure contain stocks of chemical and biological weapons. But when he asked American weapons inspectors to check out the sites, he was rebuffed.
David Gaubatz, a former member of the Air Force's Office of Special Investigations, was assigned to the Talill Air Base in Nasiriyah at the launch of Operation Iraqi Freedom. His job was to pick up any intelligence on the whereabouts of senior Baathists and weapons of mass destruction and then send the information to the American weapons inspectors gathering in Baghdad that would later become the Iraq Survey Group. For his intelligence work he received accolades and meritorious service medals in 2003 and prior years. Before the war he helped uncover a spy in the Saudi military. He also assisted with the rescue and repatriation to America of the family of Mohammed Rehaief, the Iraqi lawyer who helped save Private Jessica Lynch.
Mr. Gaubatz said he walked the streets of the largely Shiite city of Nasiriyah, interviewing local police, former senior civilian and military leaders in Saddam Hussein's regime, and local civilians.
Between March and July 2003, Mr. Gaubatz was taken by these sources to four locations - three in and around Nasiriyah and one near the port of Umm Qasr, where he was shown underground concrete bunkers with the tunnels leading to them deliberately flooded. In each case, he was told the facilities contained stocks of biological and chemical weapons, along with missiles whose range exceeded that mandated under U.N. sanctions. But because the facilities were sealed off with concrete walls, in some cases up to 5 feet thick, he did not get inside. He filed reports with photographs, exact grid coordinates, and testimony from multiple sources. And then he waited for the Iraq Survey Group to come to the sites. But in all but one case, they never arrived.
Mr. Gaubatz's new disclosures shed doubt on the thoroughness of the Iraq Survey Group's search for the weapons of mass destruction that were one of the Bush administration's main reasons for the war. Two chief inspectors from the group, David Kay and Charles Duelfer, concluded that they could not find evidence of the promised stockpiles. Mr. Kay refused to be interviewed for this story and Mr. Duelfer did not return email. The CIA referred these questions to Mr. Duelfer.
The new information from the former investigator could also end up helping the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which recently reopened the question of what happened to the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Like many current and former American and Israeli officials, the chairman of the House intelligence committee, Peter Hoekstra, says is not convinced Saddam either destroyed or never had the stockpiles of illicit weapons he was said to be concealing between 1991 and 2003." ........
"Mr. Gaubatz said each site he visited had similar characteristics. "Everything was buried and under water. They would drain canals and parts of the rivers. They would build tunnels underneath and they would let the water come back in," he said. But the water would only be allowed back into the tunnels after concrete walls were installed sealing off the secret caches of unconventional arms, Mr. Gaubatz said. He added that the tunnels in all four sites were wide enough for tractors. One of the giveaways, he said, was that homes near the sites were equipped with gas masks and other items to protect against a chemical weapons attack."
Continued page 2
Wednesday, February 8, 2006
He nails it well.
Feb 8, 2006
by Walter E Williams
"Do people have a right to medical treatment whether or not they can pay? What about a right to food or decent housing? Would a U.S. Supreme Court justice hold that these are rights just like those enumerated in our Bill of Rights? In order to have any hope of coherently answering these questions, we have to decide what is a right. The way our Constitution's framers used the term, a right is something that exists simultaneously among people and imposes no obligation on another. For example, the right to free speech, or freedom to travel, is something we all simultaneously possess. My right to free speech or freedom to travel imposes no obligation upon another except that of non-interference. In other words, my exercising my right to speech or travel requires absolutely nothing from you and in no way diminishes any of your rights.
Contrast that vision of a right to so-called rights to medical care, food or decent housing, independent of whether a person can pay. Those are not rights in the sense that free speech and freedom of travel are rights. If it is said that a person has rights to medical care, food and housing, and has no means of paying, how does he enjoy them? There's no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy who provides them. You say, "The Congress provides for those rights." Not quite. Congress does not have any resources of its very own. The only way Congress can give one American something is to first, through the use of intimidation, threats and coercion, take it from another American. So-called rights to medical care, food and decent housing impose an obligation on some other American who, through the tax code, must be denied his right to his earnings. In other words, when Congress gives one American a right to something he didn't earn, it takes away the right of another American to something he did earn.
If this bogus concept of rights were applied to free speech rights and freedom to travel, my free speech rights would impose financial obligations on others to provide me with an auditorium and microphone. My right to travel freely would require that the government take the earnings of others to provide me with airplane tickets and hotel accommodations.
Philosopher John Locke's vision of natural law guided the founders of our nation. Our Declaration of Independence expresses that vision, declaring, "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness." Government is necessary, but the only rights we can delegate to government are the ones we possess. For example, we all have a natural right to defend ourselves against predators. Since we possess that right, we can delegate authority to government to defend us. By contrast, we don't have a natural right to take the property of one person to give to another; therefore, we cannot legitimately delegate such authority to government.
Three-fifths to two-thirds of the federal budget consists of taking property from one American and giving it to another. Were a private person to do the same thing, we'd call it theft. When government does it, we euphemistically call it income redistribution, but that's exactly what thieves do -- redistribute income. Income redistribution not only betrays the founders' vision, it's a sin in the eyes of God. I'm guessing that when God gave Moses the Eighth Commandment, "Thou shalt not steal," I'm sure he didn't mean "thou shalt not steal unless there was a majority vote in Congress."
The real tragedy for our nation is that any politician who holds the values of liberty that our founders held would be soundly defeated in today's political arena.
Since 1980, Dr. Williams has served on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, VA as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics.
Tuesday, February 7, 2006
Leave it to the MSM to put a left spin to the title of an important story.
Leaks should never have happened under ANY CIRCUMSTANCES and do hope leakers are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
EXCLUSIVE: Is CIA Leak Probe a 'Witch Hunt'?
Director Launches Internal Investigation Into Who Gave Sensitive Information to the Media
Feb. 7, 2006 — The director of the CIA has launched a major internal probe into media leaks about covert operations. In an agencywide e-mail, Porter Goss blamed "a very small number of people" for leaks about secret CIA operations that, in his words, "do damage to the credibility of the agency."
According to people familiar with the Goss e-mail, sent in late January and classified secret, the CIA director warned that any CIA officer deemed suspect by the agency's Office of Security and its Counter Intelligence Center (which handles internal affairs) could be subjected to an unscheduled lie detector test. CIA personnel are subjected to polygraphs at regular intervals in their careers, but one former intelligence officer called the new warning a "witch hunt." Others said Goss' e-mail was narrowly focused and did not suggest agencywide, random lie detector tests.
"It would make no sense at all to give everyone here a lie detector test," said one person who knew about the e-mail.
Goss told CIA employees there were ways other than talking to the news media to resolve any issues they had with classified CIA operations.
The memo informs its recipients that the CIA has asked the Justice Department to prosecute any leakers within its ranks. This comes in connection with recent news reports that detailed the CIA's operation of secret prisons in Europe and its far-flung flights of suspected terrorists to foreign prisons. "........ continued
Tuesday, February 7, 2006
"Congress's Secret Saddam Tapes
By ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
February 7, 2006
Source The New York Sun
"The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is studying 12 hours of audio recordings between Saddam Hussein and his top advisers that may provide clues to the whereabouts of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.
The committee has already confirmed through the intelligence community that the recordings of Saddam's voice are authentic, according to its chairman, Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, who would not go into detail about the nature of the conversations or their context. They were provided to his committee by a former federal prosecutor, John Loftus, who says he received them from a former American military intelligence analyst.
Mr. Loftus will make the recordings available to the public on February 17 at the annual meeting of the Intelligence Summit, of which he is president. On the organization's Web site, Mr. Loftus is quoted as promising that the recordings "will be able to provide a few definitive answers to some very important - and controversial - weapons of mass destruction questions." Contacted yesterday by The New York Sun, Mr. Loftus would only say that he delivered a CD of the recordings to a representative of the committee, and the following week the committee announced that it was reopening the investigation into weapons of mass destruction.
The audio recordings are part of new evidence the House intelligence committee is piecing together that has spurred Mr. Hoekstra to reopen the question of whether Iraq had the biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons American inspectors could not turn up. President Bush called off the hunt for those weapons last year and has conceded that America has yet to find evidence of the stockpiles.
Mr. Hoekstra has already met with a former Iraqi air force general, Georges Sada, who claims that Saddam used civilian airplanes to ferry chemical weapons to Syria in 2002. Mr. Hoekstra is now talking to Iraqis who Mr. Sada claims took part in the mission, and the congressman said the former air force general "should not just be discounted." Mr. Hoekstra also said he is in touch with other people who have come forward to the committee - Iraqis and Americans - who claim that the weapons inspectors may have overlooked other key sites and evidence. He has also asked the director of national intelligence, John Negroponte, to declassify some 35,000 boxes of Iraqi documents obtained in the war that have yet to be translated.
"I still believe there are key individuals who have not been debriefed and there are key sites that have never been investigated. I know there are 35,000 boxes of documents that have never been translated. I am frustrated," Mr. Hoekstra said." ................
Continued page 2
Monday, February 6, 2006
Live link to Interpol
escape from prison
Global alert issued for Islamic extremists including mastermind of USS Cole attack
A worldwide alert has been issued by Interpol for 23 prisoners, including 13 convicted al-Qaida members, who escaped from jail in Yemen, constituting "a clear and present danger to all countries."
Among those being sought is Jamal Ahmed Badawi, the mastermind of the attack on the Navy ship USS Cole in 2000. Badawi had originally been sentenced to death for his role in the attack on the U.S. warship that killed 17 American sailors, but his sentence was later commuted to 15 years in prison. Also on the loose is Fawaz Yahya Al-Rabeei, one of those responsible for attacking the French tanker Limburg in 2002.
The world's largest international police organization says the escape from a Yemen prison took place on Friday and involved a 140-meter tunnel dug by the prisoners and co-conspirators outside." .....
...." According to Reuters, the tunnel was believed to have been dug from a mosque to the prison.
"The tunnel entry was in the women's section of the mosque, less frequented than the male section because women mainly pray at home," Reuters reported. "
Sunday, February 5, 2006
Found this on Steve Quayle, Q Factor, which highlights important articles and pictures usually daily.
"Iran Already Has the Bomb — Commentary
February 3, 2006
The Jerusalem Post
"Rafi Eitan suspects that Iran already has enough enriched uranium fissionable material to manufacture at least one or two atom bombs of the Hiroshima type. "Otherwise Iranian President Ahmadinejad would not have dared come out with his declaration that Israel should be wiped off the map," repeating it in various versions. His efforts at denying the Holocaust in which six million Jews were slaughtered prove that there is method in Ahmadinejad's madness. "Don't treat him like a madman," Chief of General Staff Dan Halutz recently cautioned.
Eitan's assessment of the situation is especially important because of his extensive intelligence experience in Israel's struggle for its existence, even before its establishment in 1948. Eitan was among those that laid the operational foundations for the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) and the Mossad.
He is credited with numerous successes above and beyond the fact that he headed the team that apprehended Adolf Eichmann in Buenos Aires in May 1960 and brought him to justice in Jerusalem. He served as Menachem Begin's special adviser on the war on terror. He was involved in the secret planning and implementation of the attack on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in June 1981.
Eitan failed in 1985 when the United States arrested Jonathan Pollard, an American navy intelligence analyst, for spying for Israel. Eitan was forced to resign after taking responsibility for running Pollard as an Israeli agent in the United States. It emerged at that time that Eitan had stood at the head of an Israeli intelligence agency known as the Office of Scientific Relations, LAKAM by its Hebrew acronym.
EITAN, CURRENTLY a private businessman who is close to 80 years old, is not only still sharp, quick and curious, but also takes a strong interest in the dangers posed to Israel. And so he came this week to the Herzliya Conference to hear the lectures and meet with colleagues from other countries.
Eitan told me: "I am convinced that the Iranians already have at least one or two nuclear devices. They have been operating centrifuges for a number of years now, they have natural uranium, and who on earth believes the Iranians when they say that they have closed down one facility or another? You would have to be an idiot or terribly na ve to believe them."
Eitan says that this view was bolstered by conversations he held with various experts from abroad who came to the Herzliya Conference - that Iran already has a an atom bomb. What should concern not only Israel but Europe too, continues Eitan, is the fact that the Iranians have acquired cruise missiles with a 3,000-kilometer range. They tried to purchase nine missiles of this kind in Ukraine from the arsenal of the former Soviet Union, but Russia thwarted part of the deal and Iran received three or four such missiles.
"In an argument with colleagues from abroad," noted Rafi Eitan, "the question was whether Iran's current president is a sort of new Hitler or merely an international manipulator. Too many experts have judged him in accordance with his actions and declarations as a kind of extremist Islamist Hitler."
The American administration of George W. Bush is entirely aware of the burgeoning Iranian nuclear danger. The question is whether the leading countries in Europe will wake up in time to the danger too. "The diplomatic struggle against the Iranian nuclear danger," warns Eitan, "must be an international one and it must come in time. The danger of nuclear weapons in the hands of Teheran is no less serious than when Saddam Hussein built the French Osirak nuclear reactor in Baghdad."
What worries Rafi Eitan is that the news coming from Teheran shows that President Ahmadinejad will not hesitate to take the most extreme measures, not unlike the methods used in the Third Reich, to put down any opposition against him. Iran has hundreds of thousands of young people who are opposed to the conceptual and cultural darkness that the fundamental Islamists are forcing on them. "Don't be surprised," Rafi Eitan told me, "if the Iranian president tries to forcibly and brutally eliminate this opposition."
Copyright 1995-2006 The Jerusalem Post
Saturday, February 4, 2006
Internet Explorer 7 has been released for Beta testing if you care to try something new. Downloaded it and so far so good. Then again I like to try out new software. From the Kim Komando weekend newsletter.....
"QT BONUS: EVEN MORE COOL THINGS YOU NEED TO KNOW
--> MICROSOFT PREVIEWS INTERNET EXPLORER 7
Microsoft is offering a preview of the upcoming Internet Explorer 7.
The new version features an enhanced design and a few new features. My
personal favorite is the tabbed browsing. Like in Firefox, you can now
have multiple sites open in one window.
But most people will be drawn to the new security tools. An anti-
phishing feature alerts you to known and suspected phishing sites. This
will help keep your information secure. Download the trial version at:
Friday, February 3, 2006
"What the U.S. Pays the U.N.
U.S. contributions to the UN (regular budget, peacekeeping operations, international tribunals, specialized agencies and subsidiary organizations) in 2004 totalled: $1,589,998,000.
The United States has the maximum assessed contribution to the UN regular budget -- 22%. In 2005 the assessed amount is $439,611,612. The minimum assessed contribution is 0.001%. The scale of assessments for each UN member for the required contributions to the regular budget is determined every 3 years on the basis of Gross National Product (GNP).
Only nine countries (starting with the largest contributor: United States, Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Canada, Spain, China) contribute 75% of the entire regular budget. Cuba, which accounts for much of the behavior of the UN Human Rights Commission and its Sub-Commission, contributes .043% of the regular budget. Oil-rich Saudi Arabia contributes .713%.
In addition to their contributions to the UN regular budget, member states contribute to the peacekeeping operations budget and the cost of international courts and tribunals. The level of these contributions is based on their assessed contributions to the regular budget plus variations which take account of permanent membership on the Security Council.
UN members also make voluntary contributions to UN specialized agencies and subsidiary organizations. The administrative costs of such bodies, though, are met from the regular budget." ....
Summary Statement " ....
Thursday, February 2, 2006
Hmmmmmmm .................. Must be ok if they do it, though.
"Murky Jack Murtha
By David Holman
Source The American Spectator
"In the last year, ever since Tom DeLay became embroiled in the Jack Abramoff scandal, the Washington Post alone has published 168 articles mentioning Abramoff and DeLay. The Post's dogged Abramoff investigator, Susan Schmidt, has written 39 articles on Jack Abramoff in the last two years. Almost half of those made page A1 of the Post, and most were over 1,000 words in length. The Post has written enough about this scandal to fill a book -- literally -- and they probably will.
Since Rep. John Murtha made his splash in November with his call for an American troop withdrawal from Iraq, there have been no stories about Robert C. "Kit" Murtha in the Post. In fact, the Post has never mentioned Kit Murtha. A quick Lexis Nexis search turns up only a dozen or so mentions of "Kit" Murtha, Robert C. Murtha, or Robert Murtha in the last 15 years. Who is "Kit" Murtha?
He's John Murtha's brother -- a Washington lobbyist whose firm reeled in more than $20 million for its defense contractor clients in the 2004 Defense appropriations bill. And the Pennsylvania congressman is the ranking Democrat on the Defense appropriations subcommittee, which he also chaired for six years before Democrats lost the House in 1994.
It's a cozy relationship the likes of which are garnering heavy attention these days in Washington. Roy Blunt's family connections to K Street have received extensive coverage, as have Harry Reid's. Yet despite a front page story in the Los Angeles Times last June exposing Kit Murtha's firm's enormous success in steering defense contracts to its clients, other newspapers have been mostly silent: the Times has yet to follow up, and Murtha's lobbying ties have earned coverage by Roll Call and only single mentions in the Village Voice, Investor's Business Daily, and the Boston Globe just this week.
If Murtha were a powerful Republican legislator, the media would probably be all over this story. A former aide from John Murtha's office, Carmen V. Scialabba, is a top official at KSA Consulting, where Kit Murtha is a senior partner. KSA has directly lobbied Murtha's office on behalf of defense clients that directly benefited from the 2004 Defense bill. Murtha's subcommittee staff helps write Defense appropriations bills and oversees the lucrative earmark requests forwarded by Democrats. The contracts for KSA clients in the bill were entirely earmarks, the L.A. Times found. The Times also reported that most of KSA's defense clients hired the firm only after Kit Murtha became a senior partner in 2002." ...... continued
Thursday, February 2, 2006
"The (blue) State of the Union Address
By Larry Elder
"My fellow Americans, I am evil.
I only care about rich people, and rich people only care about other rich people -- unless, of course, your name is Kennedy. In fact, it is misleading to say that I only care about the rich. I truly only care about Republican, white, Christian males who are rich.
I would say that I am truly the president of Halliburton, except I'm having the darndest time spelling the word "Halliburton." I'm corrupt, incompetent and racist. Oh, sure, in order to help deal with the problem of illegal aliens, I have offered a guest worker program, but "guest worker program" spelled backwards means "shoot to kill." Or at least I think it does.
The black Democratic congressman from New York, Charlie Rangel, nailed it when he called me "our Bull Connor." Donna Brazile, the black lady who ran the presidential campaign for Al Gore, also got it right. I am the titular head of the Republican Party, the party of the "white boys."
I stole the election in 2000. I conspired with the governor of Florida to steal votes. The governor of Florida just happens to be my brother. I stole the election in Ohio in 2004 by conspiring with my buddies at Diebold, who make the voting machines, which they rigged in my favor. When you think about it, those white boys at Diebold, well, they're my brothers, too.
Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation is Islam is right. I ordered the Army Corps of Engineers to blow up the levee in New Orleans in order to flood and kill black people. Oh, sure, we snagged a lot of whites -- that's why they came up with the term "collateral damage."
I'm pretty stupid. Martin Sheen, the man who played a real president on "West Wing," got it right -- I am a "moron." Aaron McGruder, who illustrates the comic strip "The Boondocks," also got it right when he called me "functionally illiterate." Maybe someday I'll wake up from this dream in which I make an SAT verbal score higher than Rhodes Scholar Bill Bradley, get better college grades than Al Gore, graduate from Yale, and get an MBA from Harvard.
I've been a lousy economic steward. I came into office with an economy headed towards recession, and shortly thereafter we endured the 9/11 terrorist attacks. We then invaded two countries, Iraq and Afghanistan. And, most recently, our economy endured hurricanes Katrina and Rita. Since I've been in office, our productivity growth has averaged over 3.5 percent per year, with inflation remaining low. Unemployment stands at 4.9 percent, 400,000 new jobs were created in the last two months, and homeownership is at an all-time high. But, I agree with nearly half of Americans who believe we are already in a recession. And I expect to go down in history -- as I should -- as presiding over the worst economy since Herbert Hoover.
I agree with Harry Belafonte and Cindy Sheehan that I am the world's greatest terrorist. I'd have to go some to emulate my idols -- Joe, Mao and Adolf -- but a fella's gotta start somewhere.
Sen. Ted Kennedy is right. I lied us into the war. Repeatedly. I intentionally sent men and women in harm's way, so that I could be a wartime president, because -- unlike Michael Dukakis -- I sure look spiffy in a flight suit. As Sen. John Kerry puts it, our military terrorizes Iraqi civilians. Meanwhile, I should tell you the real reasons for going into the war: to steer defense contracts to my buddies; to get the SOBs who tried to kill my daddy; to engage in torture; to find a justification to spy on American citizens who have no connection to terrorism whatsoever; and to send soldiers into the field with no body armor and no exit strategy.
How our military managed to topple two governments and free 55 million people just beats the dickens out of me. How Iraq and Afghanistan managed to hold free elections -- well, that's a head-scratcher. And how about that Oxford Research International poll showing almost 71 percent of Iraqis say their own life is "good"? Boy, I could use numbers like that. And even though I'm a warmonger, polls show support for terrorism is falling in the Arab world.
Yep, I not only lied, I got the British to lie. I also got the worldwide intelligence community -- the United Nations, the French, the Germans, the Egyptians, the Jordanians, and the Russians -- all to deceive the world by agreeing that Saddam possessed WMD. And who says I can't bring the world together?
I would recommend impeachment, but then you'd just get Cheney. I would go to my White House bedroom and kill myself, but then you'd just get Cheney. Oh, if only I hadn't been born. But then, as my daddy used to say, if a dog's butt were square, he'd poop bricks.
Thank you, and God bless. "
Larry Elder is a nationally syndicated newspaper columnist and publishes a monthly newsletter entitled "The Elder Statement."http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/larryelder/2006/02/02/184893.htmlNote: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled.
Wednesday, February 1, 2006
"New weapon could mean the end of collateral damage
"The U.S. military has been developing a gunship that could literally obliterate enemy ground targets with a laser beam.
The military plans to test the Advanced Tactical Laser, a laser weapon mounted on a C-130H air transport that could destroy any weapon system without collateral damage.
The laser could have tremendous repercussions on the battlefield, particularly in urban warfare in such countries as Afghanistan and Iraq. "It's the kind of tool that could bring about victory within minutes," an official said." .................
Wednesday, February 1, 2006
" American Indians have the highest per-capita participation in the armed services of any ethnic group. Lundstrom’s father, Ed, now retired, was a career Marine."
Wednesday, February 1, 2006
Now that the "Oil For Food" teat has been cut off, the highly corrupt UN is hatching another shakedown scheme. A world tax with the US bearing the brunt of that tax under the guise of environmental initiatives, assisting poverty struck nations.
Summarily boils down to their to the UN's Marxist philosophy of income and asset redistribution where monies are forcibly taken from producing people and funneled through the UN (likely to support more corruption uncovered in their carefully concealed copiously denied "Oil For Food" money diversion scheme) to end up in the hands of third world dictators to buy palaces and limos, in the name of assisting our fellow humans.
Shakedown scheme so that UN officials and their cronies can divert it to their own personal use for an endless party.
We need to inform ourselves about the Fair Tax and demand that it be instituted now before Washington caves on this UN scheme and tacks another %%% onto what we're already paying.
The Fair Tax is a consumption tax. No one pays any tax up to the poverty line. Necessities are not taxed. I'll be posting more about the Fair Tax when it becomes available but benefits of it are that the government is funded based upon what we CHOOSE TO SPEND ...... if we're not happy with them we stop spending and rein them in which returns control of the government to the people.
"UN unveils plan to release untapped wealth of...$7 trillion (and solve the world's problems at a stroke)"
Source THE INDEPENDENT
The most potent threats to life on earth - global warming, health pandemics, poverty and armed conflict - could be ended by moves that would unlock $7 trillion - $7,000,000,000,000 (£3.9trn) - of previously untapped wealth, the United Nations claims today.
The price? An admission that the nation-state is an old-fashioned concept that has no role to play in a modern globalised world where financial markets have to be harnessed rather than simply condemned.
In a groundbreaking move, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) has drawn up a visionary proposal that has been endorsed by a range of figures including Gordon Brown, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Laureate.
It says an unprecedented outbreak of co-operation between countries, applied through six specific financial tools, would slice through the Gordian knot of problems that have bedevilled the world for most of the last century.
If its recommendations are accepted - and the authors acknowledge this could take years or even decades - it could finally force countries to face up to the fact that their public finance and growth figures conceal the vast damage their economies do to the environment.
At the heart of the proposal, unveiled at a gathering of world business leaders at the Swiss ski resort of Davos, is a push to get countries to account for the cost of failed policies, and use the money saved "up front" to avert crises before they hit. Top of the list is a challenge to the United States to join an international pollution permit trading system which, the UN claims, could deliver $3.64trn of global wealth.
Inge Kaul, a special adviser at the UNDP, said: "The way we run our economies today is vastly expensive and inefficient because we don't manage risk well and we don't prevent crises." She downplayed concerns over up-front costs and interest payments for the new-fangled financial devices. "The gains in terms of development would outweigh those costs. Money is wasted because we dribble aid, and the costs of not solving the problems are much, much higher than what we would have to pay for getting the financial markets to lend the money."
The UNDP is determined to ensure globalisation, which has generated vast wealth for multinational companies, benefits the poorest in society.
It urges politicians to embrace some groundbreaking schemes put in place in the past 12 months to tackle global warning, poverty and disease, based on working with the global markets to share out the risk.
These include a pilot international finance facility (IFF) to "front load" $4bn of cash for vaccines by borrowing money against pledges of future government aid.
The scheme, which is backed by the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Sweden and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, was born out of a proposal by Gordon Brown for a larger scheme to double the total aid budget to $100bn a year.
In an endorsement of the report, Mr Brown said: "This shows how we can equip people and countries for a new global economy that combined greater prosperity and fairness both within and across nations."
The UNDP says rich countries should build on this and go further. It proposes six schemes to harness the power of the markets:
* Reducing greenhouse gas emissions through pollution permit trading; net gain $3.64trn.
* Cutting poor countries' borrowing costs by securing the debts against the income from stable parts of their economies; net gain $2.90trn.
* Reducing government debt costs by linking payments to the country's economic output; net gain $600bn.
* An enlarged version of the vaccine scheme; net gain (including benefits of lower mortality) $47bn.
* Using the vast flow of money from migrants back to their home country to guarantee; net gain $31bn.
* Aid agencies underwriting loans to market investors to lower interest rates; net gain $22bn.
Professor Stiglitz, the former chief economist of the World Bank and a staunch critic of the way globalisation harms the poor, said: "Globalisation has meant the closer integration of countries, and that in turn has meant a greater need for collective action.
"One of the most important areas of failure is the environment. Without government intervention, firms and households have no incentive to limit their pollution." He said a global public finance system would force countries to acknowledge the external damage their policies had, "the most important being global climate change".
Solving the environmental crisis tops the UN's $7trn wish-list. It calls for an international market to trade pollution permits that would encourage rich countries to cut pollution and hit their targets under the Kyoto protocol.
But - and the UN admits it is a big "but" - the US would have to sign up to Kyoto and carbon trading to achieve the $3.64trn that it believes the system would deliver over time.
"We are dealing with a global problem as pollution can only be dealt with internationally," Ms Kaul said. Richard Sandor, the head of the Chicago Climate Exchange, added: "Many encouraging signs are emerging. When the business case is clear, private entrepreneurs step forward."
But, the proposal is unlikely to get support from some green groups who believe that action to curb consumption, rather than market incentives, are the way to reduce carbon emissions." ............
September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 January 2013 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 March 2011 January 2011 December 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 March 2005 November 2004 October 2004