http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070927/D8RU0NAG0.html
Alabama City Reopening Fallout Shelters
Sep 27, 3:57 PM (ET)
By JAY REEVES
HUNTSVILLE, Ala. (AP) - In an age of al-Qaida, sleeper cells and the threat of nuclear terrorism, Huntsville is dusting off its Cold War manual to create the nation's most ambitious fallout-shelter plan, featuring an abandoned mine big enough for 20,000 people to take cover underground.
Others would hunker down in college dorms, churches, libraries and research halls that planners hope will bring the community's shelter capacity to 300,000, or space for every man, woman and child in Huntsville and the surrounding county.
Emergency planners in Huntsville - an out-of-the-way city best known as the home of NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center - say the idea makes sense because radioactive fallout could be scattered for hundreds of miles if terrorists detonated a nuclear bomb.
"If Huntsville is in the blast zone, there's not much we can do. But if it's just fallout ... shelters would absorb 90 percent of the radiation," said longtime emergency management planner Kirk Paradise, whose Cold War expertise with fallout shelters led local leaders to renew Huntsville's program.
Huntsville's project, developed using $70,000 from a Homeland Security grant, goes against the grain because the United States essentially scrapped its national plan for fallout shelters after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Congress cut off funding and the government published its last list of approved shelters at the end of 1992.
After Sept. 11, Homeland Security created a metropolitan protection program that includes nuclear-attack preparation and mass shelters. But no other city has taken the idea as far as Huntsville has, officials said.
Many cities advise residents to stay at home and seal up a room with plastic and duct tape during a biological, chemical or nuclear attack. Huntsville does too, in certain cases.
Local officials agree the "shelter-in-place" method would be best for a "dirty bomb" that scattered nuclear contamination through conventional explosives. But they say full-fledged shelters would be needed to protect from the fallout of a nuclear bomb.
Program leaders recently briefed members of Congress, including Rep. Charlie Dent, R-Pa., who called the shelter plan an example of the "all-hazards" approach needed for emergency preparedness.
"Al-Qaida, we know, is interested in a nuclear capability. It's our nation's fear that a nuclear weapon could get into terrorists' hands," Dent said.
As fallout shelters go, the Three Caves Quarry just outside downtown offers the kind of protection that would make Dr. Strangelove proud, with space for an arena-size crowd of some 20,000 people.
Last mined in the early '50s, the limestone quarry is dug 300 yards into the side of the mountain, with ceilings as high as 60 feet and 10 acres of floor space covered with jagged rocks. Jet-black in places with a year-round temperature of about 60 degrees, it has a colony of bats living in its highest reaches and baby stalactites hanging from the ceiling.
"It would be a little trying, but it's better than the alternative," said Andy Prewett, a manager with The Land Trust of Huntsville and North Alabama, a nonprofit preservation group that owns the mine and is making it available for free.
In all, the Huntsville-Madison County Emergency Management Agency has identified 105 places that can be used as fallout shelters for about 210,000 people. They are still looking for about 50 more shelters that would hold an additional 100,000 people.
While officials have yet to launch a campaign to inform people of the shelters, a local access TV channel showed a video about the program, which also is explained on a county Web site.
If a bomb went off tomorrow, Paradise said, officials would tell people where to find shelter through emergency alerts on TV and radio stations. "We're pretty much ready to go because we have a list of shelters," he said.
Most of the shelters would offer more comfort than the abandoned mine, such as buildings at the University of Alabama in Huntsville that would house 37,643. A single research hall could hold more than 8,100.
Homeland Security spokeswoman Alexandra Kirin said of Huntsville's wide-ranging plan: "We're not aware of any other cities that are doing that."
Plans call for staying inside for as long as two weeks after a bomb blast, though shelters might be needed for only a few hours in a less dire emergency.
Unlike the fallout shelters set up during the Cold War, the new ones will not be stocked with water, food or other supplies. For survivors of a nuclear attack, it would be strictly "BYOE" - bring your own everything. Just throw down a sleeping bag on the courthouse floor - or move some of the rocks on the mine floor - and make yourself at home.
"We do not guarantee them comfort, just protection," said Paradise, who is coordinating the shelter plans for the local emergency management agency.
Convenience store owner Tandi Prince said she cannot imagine living in the cavern after a bombing.
"That would probably not be very fun," she said
Friday, September 28, 2007
Day says border not porous, despite U.S. outrage
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070927/border_danger_070927/20070927?hub=TopStories
Day says border not porous, despite U.S. outrage
Updated Thu. Sep. 27 2007 11:20 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
Stockwell Day said that for every person who illegally crosses the U.S.-Canada border, there are thousands who are caught, after a report accusing border security of being weak was presented to U.S. Congress on Thursday.
"You will read from time to time about someone who has been able to get, when they thought nobody was looking, across the thousands and thousands of kilometres of border," Canada's Public Safety Minister said in Edmonton.
"What you didn't read about are the 21,000 people last year who didn't make it, who tried at various points, either at official border points or unofficial border points."
The 13-page report was presented by investigators with the independent Government Accountability Office who smuggled fake weapon components from Canada into the U.S.
It suggested that the border was porous and dangerous to the country.
"The northern border is a significant threat as a terrorist point of entry," said Ken Luongo, Executive Director of the Partnership for Global Security.
The report comes after GAO officers were sent out with large red duffel bags, containing simulated nuclear weapons and other contraband, to try transferring them at unmonitored and unfenced points between the two countries.
They succeeded three out of four times.
U.S. politicians used the report as an excuse to point the finger at Canada's weak security.
"Say I'm in Canada and I want to make a dirty bomb. How easily can I do so?" said U.S. Senate Finance Comm. Chair Max Baucus
Senator Ken Salazar (D-Colorado) demanded tighter security along the border.
"With the possible exception of the United States, there are more international terrorist organizations active in Canada than anywhere else in the world," said Salazar.
Day said that in the last 19 months, Canada has put $431 million towards improving infrastructure at border points and $19.5 million to expanding integrated border teams, hiring 400 officers.
"No country is immune to terrorism, but I can tell you with the increased resources, both on the dollar side, the technology side and the personnel side, we're safer than we were a year and a half ago," he said.
However, investigators said they found that with a little ingenuity the border could easily be penetrated.
"Our work shows that a determined cross-border violator would likely be able to bring radioactive materials or other contraband undetected into the United States by crossing the U.S.-Canada border at any of the locations we investigated," the GAO report concluded.
As of May 2007, there were 972 American border guards and customs officers patrolling the divide stateside while the U.S. employed nearly 12,000 agents along its southern border with Mexico, Baucus said on Thursday during a hearing on the report's findings.
"The GOA investigation found this raised serious questions about the balance of resources on both borders," Baucus said.
Canada doing its part: Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper responded to the report Thursday saying that Canada is doing its part in maintaining border security by making "significant investments both in processes and people."
"As you know, these particular materials were emitted through American security on the American side of the border," Harper said in Toronto.
"But obviously we have to be concerned. We work hand and glove with American authorities dealing with any kind of threats or potential threats, and I think American officials will tell you that."
Four spots in northern states along the 8,000-kilometre border were tested, though they were not identified in the report.
At one site, investigators conducted a 10-minute exercise, setting up a cross-border exchange of the duffel bag.
The exercise was recorded and photographed by GAO investigators.
In that instance, a resident of the area became suspicious and alerted border officials that something suspicious was taking place.
Authorities were called to the scene but were unable to find the GAO investigators.
"It's so hard to believe there's been so little progress in plugging these gaping security holes," Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said during Thursday's hearing. "They're simply wide open, waiting to be crossed by anyone carrying anything, even a dirty bomb or a suitcase-type nuclear device."
Last year's GAO border test found authorities failed to catch 93 per cent of GAO investigators entering the U.S. with fake documents, Grassley said.
"Last year we learned that our check points were vulnerable to fake documents and this year, we're going to hear that the areas between the check points are as vulnerable as ever." Grassley said.
It is illegal to cross the border anywhere other than an official border entry point.
With reports from CTV's Joy Malbon and The Associated Press in Washington
Day says border not porous, despite U.S. outrage
Updated Thu. Sep. 27 2007 11:20 PM ET
CTV.ca News Staff
Stockwell Day said that for every person who illegally crosses the U.S.-Canada border, there are thousands who are caught, after a report accusing border security of being weak was presented to U.S. Congress on Thursday.
"You will read from time to time about someone who has been able to get, when they thought nobody was looking, across the thousands and thousands of kilometres of border," Canada's Public Safety Minister said in Edmonton.
"What you didn't read about are the 21,000 people last year who didn't make it, who tried at various points, either at official border points or unofficial border points."
The 13-page report was presented by investigators with the independent Government Accountability Office who smuggled fake weapon components from Canada into the U.S.
It suggested that the border was porous and dangerous to the country.
"The northern border is a significant threat as a terrorist point of entry," said Ken Luongo, Executive Director of the Partnership for Global Security.
The report comes after GAO officers were sent out with large red duffel bags, containing simulated nuclear weapons and other contraband, to try transferring them at unmonitored and unfenced points between the two countries.
They succeeded three out of four times.
U.S. politicians used the report as an excuse to point the finger at Canada's weak security.
"Say I'm in Canada and I want to make a dirty bomb. How easily can I do so?" said U.S. Senate Finance Comm. Chair Max Baucus
Senator Ken Salazar (D-Colorado) demanded tighter security along the border.
"With the possible exception of the United States, there are more international terrorist organizations active in Canada than anywhere else in the world," said Salazar.
Day said that in the last 19 months, Canada has put $431 million towards improving infrastructure at border points and $19.5 million to expanding integrated border teams, hiring 400 officers.
"No country is immune to terrorism, but I can tell you with the increased resources, both on the dollar side, the technology side and the personnel side, we're safer than we were a year and a half ago," he said.
However, investigators said they found that with a little ingenuity the border could easily be penetrated.
"Our work shows that a determined cross-border violator would likely be able to bring radioactive materials or other contraband undetected into the United States by crossing the U.S.-Canada border at any of the locations we investigated," the GAO report concluded.
As of May 2007, there were 972 American border guards and customs officers patrolling the divide stateside while the U.S. employed nearly 12,000 agents along its southern border with Mexico, Baucus said on Thursday during a hearing on the report's findings.
"The GOA investigation found this raised serious questions about the balance of resources on both borders," Baucus said.
Canada doing its part: Harper
Prime Minister Stephen Harper responded to the report Thursday saying that Canada is doing its part in maintaining border security by making "significant investments both in processes and people."
"As you know, these particular materials were emitted through American security on the American side of the border," Harper said in Toronto.
"But obviously we have to be concerned. We work hand and glove with American authorities dealing with any kind of threats or potential threats, and I think American officials will tell you that."
Four spots in northern states along the 8,000-kilometre border were tested, though they were not identified in the report.
At one site, investigators conducted a 10-minute exercise, setting up a cross-border exchange of the duffel bag.
The exercise was recorded and photographed by GAO investigators.
In that instance, a resident of the area became suspicious and alerted border officials that something suspicious was taking place.
Authorities were called to the scene but were unable to find the GAO investigators.
"It's so hard to believe there's been so little progress in plugging these gaping security holes," Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said during Thursday's hearing. "They're simply wide open, waiting to be crossed by anyone carrying anything, even a dirty bomb or a suitcase-type nuclear device."
Last year's GAO border test found authorities failed to catch 93 per cent of GAO investigators entering the U.S. with fake documents, Grassley said.
"Last year we learned that our check points were vulnerable to fake documents and this year, we're going to hear that the areas between the check points are as vulnerable as ever." Grassley said.
It is illegal to cross the border anywhere other than an official border entry point.
With reports from CTV's Joy Malbon and The Associated Press in Washington
PAKISTAN: TALIBAN MILITANTS FORCE BURQA ON CHRISTIAN WOMEN’S SCHOOL
http://www.compassdirect.org/en/display.php?page=lead&lang=en&length=long&idelement=&backpage=&critere=&countryname=&rowcur=
PAKISTAN: TALIBAN MILITANTS FORCE BURQA ON CHRISTIAN WOMEN’S SCHOOL
Extremists violently enforce Islamization in unruly northern district.
Women in burqas
ISTANBUL, September 27 (Compass Direct News) – A Pakistani official in a northern district warned female teachers and students to don Islamic garb this week, citing threats from Taliban extremists active in the area.
The Pakistani Executive District Officer (EDO) issued a notice requiring female students in Swat district to wear burqas, an outer garment cloaking nearly the entire body, according to an article on Tuesday (September 25) in regional newspaper Daily Mashriq.
Christians in the Afghan-border region 120 miles north of Peshawar say that extremists from the Taliban movement, which ruled most of Afghanistan from 1995 to 2001, have targeted them in recent months.
Extremists in Swat have conducted a campaign of Islamization in the district against all things deemed un-Islamic since early July, when a government crackdown on militants at the Lal Masjid mosque in Islamabad triggered violent reactions nationwide.
“Due to continuous threatening letters from the Taliban directing female staff and students to wear burqas … the Executive District Officer has instructed [them] to comply with the orders,” the Daily Mashriq article stated.
The order to cover up under the full-body robe that leaves only the hands and eyes visible may affect Christians at the Catholic-run Public High School in Sangota.
The all-girls school had already closed down for a week this month after being threatened with suicide attacks for supposedly converting students to Christianity.
Swat EDO Ghulam Akhbar was not available for comment when contacted by telephone, and a colleague could not confirm the existence of the circular ordering burqa attire. But a Swat representative in the provincial assembly said yesterday that Akhbar had denied issuing the notice, though the officer had told female students to cover up.
“He has said verbally to the schools that you must use burqas,” Mutahida Majlis-i-Amal politician Hussain Ahmad told Compass, minutes after speaking with Akhbar.
Apostolic Carmelite sisters in charge of Sangota Public High School refused to comment on the issue. Diocesan Bishop Anthony Lobo was unavailable when contacted by Compass.
Suicide Bomb Threats
The all-girls school re-opened its doors on September 17 after a threat letter from Muslim extremists forced it to shut down for a week.
Entitled “Red Notice for Public School Sangota, (The Factory of Englishmen),” the September 8 letter accused the nuns of involving students in adultery, according to a Union of Catholic News for Asia (UCAN) article.
The Urdu-language note said that Christian teachers were converting Muslim students, who make up more than 99 percent of the schools 950 students, to Christianity. The Catholic Church’s National Commission for Justice and Peace reported that the extremists also told parents to withdraw their girls and place them in Islamic schools.
The letter threatened suicide bombings if the school did not require its students to wear burqas and fire all Christian and male teachers by September 17. Only half of the students returned when the high school reopened its doors on September 17 with assurances of increased security from local officials, UCAN reported.
One top clergyman who traveled to the area following the threats told Compass that he suspected the letter came not from outside extremists, but from a teacher at the school who wished to take it over. Whether or not the letter was such an “inside job,” it fits a pattern of increasing threats and violence in Swat targeting practices considered un-Islamic.
Since July, extremists have stepped up attacks on stores and institutions viewed as Western, as well as on police and government officials.
In a single explosion, militants blew up 63 CD rental shops and shoe stores in the Swat town of Mingora on September 7, the Daily Times reported. The article said that a few days before the attacks, owners of the stores had received letters telling them to “close their ‘un-Islamic’ businesses or face bomb attacks.”
On September 11, militants blasted rocks carved with Buddha’s image in Swat’s Buthgarh Jehanabad historical site, imitating the Afghan Taliban’s destruction of the Bamiya Buddha statues in 2001.
“It’s something like anarchy and chaos in that area,” provincial representative Ahmad told Compass. He said that the army had been called in after police and Frontier provincial officials failed to retain control.
Christians Under Pressure
Christians living in Swat, numbering about 1,000, say they have come under increasing pressure for their faith in recent months.
Two nights ago, militants approached hired Muslim guards at Swat Christian Camp, a Christian-run retreat center in Mingora, and demanded that they quit their jobs.
“They are Christian, why are you working with them?” the militants demanded of the guards, according to a local source who requested anonymity. The camp has been closed since July 5 after a crackdown on Islamic militants at the Lal Masjid mosque in Islamabad set off violent repercussions throughout the country.
A Christian running a small medical clinic has been forced to close down the center and conduct only home visits in order to avoid attack.
“My 17-year old daughter cannot go outside without wearing a burqa,” one local Christian told Compass.
Christians in the North-West Frontier Province have received a number of anonymous threats telling them to convert to Islam since May.
“Embrace Islam and become Muslims … otherwise, after next Friday, August 10, your colony will be ruined,” read one of more than a dozen identical letters thrown into the courtyards of Christian and Hindu homes in Peshawar last month.
Police increased security around churches and Christian neighborhoods, but the threats were never carried out.
More than 50 Christians fled the town of Charsadda in May after a local Christian politician received a letter telling the Christian community to convert to Islam within 10 days. The threat was repeated, chalked on the wall of a building opposite the church, 10 days later.
Two young men from a local Islamic school eventually confessed to having written the threats as a joke.
In an unrelated incident, a Catholic elementary school in Bannu, west of Peshawar, was bombed on September 15. The blast destroyed the chapel windows and furniture, leaving a hole in the side of a classroom wall.
The identity of the bombers and their motive remain uncertain.
---------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Religion of Peace?
PAKISTAN: TALIBAN MILITANTS FORCE BURQA ON CHRISTIAN WOMEN’S SCHOOL
Extremists violently enforce Islamization in unruly northern district.
Women in burqas
ISTANBUL, September 27 (Compass Direct News) – A Pakistani official in a northern district warned female teachers and students to don Islamic garb this week, citing threats from Taliban extremists active in the area.
The Pakistani Executive District Officer (EDO) issued a notice requiring female students in Swat district to wear burqas, an outer garment cloaking nearly the entire body, according to an article on Tuesday (September 25) in regional newspaper Daily Mashriq.
Christians in the Afghan-border region 120 miles north of Peshawar say that extremists from the Taliban movement, which ruled most of Afghanistan from 1995 to 2001, have targeted them in recent months.
Extremists in Swat have conducted a campaign of Islamization in the district against all things deemed un-Islamic since early July, when a government crackdown on militants at the Lal Masjid mosque in Islamabad triggered violent reactions nationwide.
“Due to continuous threatening letters from the Taliban directing female staff and students to wear burqas … the Executive District Officer has instructed [them] to comply with the orders,” the Daily Mashriq article stated.
The order to cover up under the full-body robe that leaves only the hands and eyes visible may affect Christians at the Catholic-run Public High School in Sangota.
The all-girls school had already closed down for a week this month after being threatened with suicide attacks for supposedly converting students to Christianity.
Swat EDO Ghulam Akhbar was not available for comment when contacted by telephone, and a colleague could not confirm the existence of the circular ordering burqa attire. But a Swat representative in the provincial assembly said yesterday that Akhbar had denied issuing the notice, though the officer had told female students to cover up.
“He has said verbally to the schools that you must use burqas,” Mutahida Majlis-i-Amal politician Hussain Ahmad told Compass, minutes after speaking with Akhbar.
Apostolic Carmelite sisters in charge of Sangota Public High School refused to comment on the issue. Diocesan Bishop Anthony Lobo was unavailable when contacted by Compass.
Suicide Bomb Threats
The all-girls school re-opened its doors on September 17 after a threat letter from Muslim extremists forced it to shut down for a week.
Entitled “Red Notice for Public School Sangota, (The Factory of Englishmen),” the September 8 letter accused the nuns of involving students in adultery, according to a Union of Catholic News for Asia (UCAN) article.
The Urdu-language note said that Christian teachers were converting Muslim students, who make up more than 99 percent of the schools 950 students, to Christianity. The Catholic Church’s National Commission for Justice and Peace reported that the extremists also told parents to withdraw their girls and place them in Islamic schools.
The letter threatened suicide bombings if the school did not require its students to wear burqas and fire all Christian and male teachers by September 17. Only half of the students returned when the high school reopened its doors on September 17 with assurances of increased security from local officials, UCAN reported.
One top clergyman who traveled to the area following the threats told Compass that he suspected the letter came not from outside extremists, but from a teacher at the school who wished to take it over. Whether or not the letter was such an “inside job,” it fits a pattern of increasing threats and violence in Swat targeting practices considered un-Islamic.
Since July, extremists have stepped up attacks on stores and institutions viewed as Western, as well as on police and government officials.
In a single explosion, militants blew up 63 CD rental shops and shoe stores in the Swat town of Mingora on September 7, the Daily Times reported. The article said that a few days before the attacks, owners of the stores had received letters telling them to “close their ‘un-Islamic’ businesses or face bomb attacks.”
On September 11, militants blasted rocks carved with Buddha’s image in Swat’s Buthgarh Jehanabad historical site, imitating the Afghan Taliban’s destruction of the Bamiya Buddha statues in 2001.
“It’s something like anarchy and chaos in that area,” provincial representative Ahmad told Compass. He said that the army had been called in after police and Frontier provincial officials failed to retain control.
Christians Under Pressure
Christians living in Swat, numbering about 1,000, say they have come under increasing pressure for their faith in recent months.
Two nights ago, militants approached hired Muslim guards at Swat Christian Camp, a Christian-run retreat center in Mingora, and demanded that they quit their jobs.
“They are Christian, why are you working with them?” the militants demanded of the guards, according to a local source who requested anonymity. The camp has been closed since July 5 after a crackdown on Islamic militants at the Lal Masjid mosque in Islamabad set off violent repercussions throughout the country.
A Christian running a small medical clinic has been forced to close down the center and conduct only home visits in order to avoid attack.
“My 17-year old daughter cannot go outside without wearing a burqa,” one local Christian told Compass.
Christians in the North-West Frontier Province have received a number of anonymous threats telling them to convert to Islam since May.
“Embrace Islam and become Muslims … otherwise, after next Friday, August 10, your colony will be ruined,” read one of more than a dozen identical letters thrown into the courtyards of Christian and Hindu homes in Peshawar last month.
Police increased security around churches and Christian neighborhoods, but the threats were never carried out.
More than 50 Christians fled the town of Charsadda in May after a local Christian politician received a letter telling the Christian community to convert to Islam within 10 days. The threat was repeated, chalked on the wall of a building opposite the church, 10 days later.
Two young men from a local Islamic school eventually confessed to having written the threats as a joke.
In an unrelated incident, a Catholic elementary school in Bannu, west of Peshawar, was bombed on September 15. The blast destroyed the chapel windows and furniture, leaving a hole in the side of a classroom wall.
The identity of the bombers and their motive remain uncertain.
---------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Religion of Peace?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-09-26-moving_N.htm
Illegal immigrants moving out
By Emily Bazar, USA TODAY
Illegal immigrants living in states and cities that have adopted strict immigration policies are packing up and moving back to their home countries or to neighboring states.
The exodus has been fueled by a wave of laws targeting illegal immigrants in Oklahoma, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and elsewhere. Many were passed after congressional efforts to overhaul the immigration system collapsed in June.
Immigrants say the laws have raised fears of workplace raids and deportation.
"People now are really frightened and scared because they don't know what's going to happen," says Juliana Stout, an editor at the newspaper El Nacional de Oklahoma. "They're selling houses. They're leaving the country."
Supporters of the laws cheer the departure of illegal immigrants and say the laws are working as intended.
Oklahoma state Rep. Randy Terrill, Republican author of his state's law, says the flight proves it is working. "That was the intended purpose," he says. "It would be just fine with me if we exported all illegal aliens to the surrounding states."
Most provisions of an Oklahoma law take effect in November. Among other things, it cuts off benefits such as welfare and college financial aid.
There's no hard demographic data on the trend, partly because it's hard to track people who are in the USA illegally. But school officials, real estate agents and church leaders say the movement is unmistakable.
In Tulsa, schools have seen a drop in Hispanic enrollment.
About 60% of Kendall-Whittier Elementary School's 950 students are Hispanic, Principal Judy Feary says. Since an enrollment report Sept. 10, she says, 14 have left. Four more said last week that they would move.
Three weeks ago, one couple dropped their three children at school, then returned after lunch with their belongings packed in an SUV and trailer. Feary says they took the kids and said they were moving back to Mexico. "They were afraid and cited the immigration law," she says.
Marshall Elementary, where enrollment is 60% Hispanic, has lost about 10 students this year to the immigration law, Principal Kayla Robinson says. Most moved to Texas. "These are families that have been here for a long time," she says.
Illegal immigrants also are leaving Georgia, where a law requires companies on government contracts with at least 500 employees to check new hires against a federal database to make sure they are legally authorized to work.
Mario Reyes, senior minister at the Tabernacle of Atlanta, says his church lost about 10 families this summer. His daughter, a real estate agent, is helping them sell their homes.
Churches across the city report similar losses, says Antonio Mansogo, a board member of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders.
"There's tension because you don't know when immigration (agents) might show up, and a lot of people don't want to take those chances," he says.
Real estate agent Guadalupe Sosa in Avondale, Ariz., outside Phoenix, says migration from the state began about three months ago, shortly after Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, signed a law that will take effect in January. Employers who hire illegal immigrants can lose their business licenses.
Of the 10 homes Sosa has on the market, half belong to families that plan to leave because of immigration tensions.
"They know they might be losing everything today or tomorrow," she says.
Maria Sanchez, 35, joined the migration with her sister and nephew, who are in the country legally. Sanchez was in the USA illegally, but she has gotten a temporary work permit.
The three lived in Aurora, Colo., when Sanchez was fired from her job as district manager of a fast-food chain after she couldn't provide a valid Social Security number.
Colorado has approved several immigration measures. One gives employers 20 days to check and photocopy documents such as driver's licenses and Social Security cards, which new workers present to prove their legal status.
Because of the laws, Sanchez, her sister and nephew left five months ago. "I moved to Utah because they don't have the same laws here," she says.
State Sen. Dave Schultheis says he hasn't observed a major migration out of Colorado but has heard anecdotal reports that illegal immigrants are leaving. "It's absolutely a good thing," he says. "We want to make Colorado the least friendly state to people who are here illegally."
In Hazleton, Pa., families started moving away after the city passed an illegal-immigrant law last summer, says Rudy Espinal, head of the Hazleton Hispanic Business Association. The law would fine landlords who rented to illegal immigrants and suspend the business licenses of companies that hired them. A companion measure would require tenants to register with the city and pay $10 for a rental permit.
A federal judge ruled the measures unconstitutional in July, but that hasn't stopped people moving away, he says.
"People are still leaving," Espinal says. "Some people have told me that they're leaving because they don't want their kids to grow up in an environment like this."
Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta counters that some illegal immigrants who moved came back after the judge's decision, which the city is appealing. "I see a reversal," he says. "In a small city, it becomes obvious. … Schools are overcrowded and there are five-hour waits in the emergency room."
He says, "We don't want to chase immigrants away, just the illegal aliens who are causing many of the problem we are having."
------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
This is clear proof that deportation through attrition does and will work.
Democrats (& some Republicans) are underestimating the number of American citizens of BOTH parties that are outraged over any type of amnesty for lawbreakers/illegal aliens. In their rabid lust for post amnesty appreciative voters, the Dems have forgotten that illegal immigration hits lower income and minority American citizens & LEGAL aliens the hardest. You know who I mean - the people who do those jobs Americans WANT and HAVE to do based on their education and skills levels. NOT those who have no worries about an illegal taking over their job or won't feel the negative effects of their wages plummeting because of a surge of illegal immigrant labor flooding into that worker's hometown.
Hopefully some of you out there will remember that a main Democratic AND Liberal cause USED to be protection for the lower & mid-lower income AMERICAN CITIZEN workers. In turn these workers supported the Democratic Party through thick and thin only to be quickly cast aside as the Democrats greedily pander to illegals for votes.
When did supporting American workers become something bad?? I feel far more responsibility towards my fellow Americans--don't you?. I refuse to be ashamed of my allegiance for the American workers. Mexico has a plethora of problems it could fix if the country's politicians & wealthy were so motivated - but they care so little about their fellow countrymen that they'd rather export their poor by the millions rather than make a better life for them in Mexico. Isn't that what pro illegal aliens and opend border activists want us to do?? == Sacrifice our workers so the rich get richer and the American Dream becomes nothing more than an illusion for our hard working American citizens? Because once you ditch our American citizen workers that is exactly what you will get -- and it will result in the ruination of the American lower and middle class.
If they don't like the environment, let them go back where they came from and then become an immigrant the legal way.
Illegal immigrants moving out
By Emily Bazar, USA TODAY
Illegal immigrants living in states and cities that have adopted strict immigration policies are packing up and moving back to their home countries or to neighboring states.
The exodus has been fueled by a wave of laws targeting illegal immigrants in Oklahoma, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia and elsewhere. Many were passed after congressional efforts to overhaul the immigration system collapsed in June.
Immigrants say the laws have raised fears of workplace raids and deportation.
"People now are really frightened and scared because they don't know what's going to happen," says Juliana Stout, an editor at the newspaper El Nacional de Oklahoma. "They're selling houses. They're leaving the country."
Supporters of the laws cheer the departure of illegal immigrants and say the laws are working as intended.
Oklahoma state Rep. Randy Terrill, Republican author of his state's law, says the flight proves it is working. "That was the intended purpose," he says. "It would be just fine with me if we exported all illegal aliens to the surrounding states."
Most provisions of an Oklahoma law take effect in November. Among other things, it cuts off benefits such as welfare and college financial aid.
There's no hard demographic data on the trend, partly because it's hard to track people who are in the USA illegally. But school officials, real estate agents and church leaders say the movement is unmistakable.
In Tulsa, schools have seen a drop in Hispanic enrollment.
About 60% of Kendall-Whittier Elementary School's 950 students are Hispanic, Principal Judy Feary says. Since an enrollment report Sept. 10, she says, 14 have left. Four more said last week that they would move.
Three weeks ago, one couple dropped their three children at school, then returned after lunch with their belongings packed in an SUV and trailer. Feary says they took the kids and said they were moving back to Mexico. "They were afraid and cited the immigration law," she says.
Marshall Elementary, where enrollment is 60% Hispanic, has lost about 10 students this year to the immigration law, Principal Kayla Robinson says. Most moved to Texas. "These are families that have been here for a long time," she says.
Illegal immigrants also are leaving Georgia, where a law requires companies on government contracts with at least 500 employees to check new hires against a federal database to make sure they are legally authorized to work.
Mario Reyes, senior minister at the Tabernacle of Atlanta, says his church lost about 10 families this summer. His daughter, a real estate agent, is helping them sell their homes.
Churches across the city report similar losses, says Antonio Mansogo, a board member of the National Coalition of Latino Clergy and Christian Leaders.
"There's tension because you don't know when immigration (agents) might show up, and a lot of people don't want to take those chances," he says.
Real estate agent Guadalupe Sosa in Avondale, Ariz., outside Phoenix, says migration from the state began about three months ago, shortly after Gov. Janet Napolitano, a Democrat, signed a law that will take effect in January. Employers who hire illegal immigrants can lose their business licenses.
Of the 10 homes Sosa has on the market, half belong to families that plan to leave because of immigration tensions.
"They know they might be losing everything today or tomorrow," she says.
Maria Sanchez, 35, joined the migration with her sister and nephew, who are in the country legally. Sanchez was in the USA illegally, but she has gotten a temporary work permit.
The three lived in Aurora, Colo., when Sanchez was fired from her job as district manager of a fast-food chain after she couldn't provide a valid Social Security number.
Colorado has approved several immigration measures. One gives employers 20 days to check and photocopy documents such as driver's licenses and Social Security cards, which new workers present to prove their legal status.
Because of the laws, Sanchez, her sister and nephew left five months ago. "I moved to Utah because they don't have the same laws here," she says.
State Sen. Dave Schultheis says he hasn't observed a major migration out of Colorado but has heard anecdotal reports that illegal immigrants are leaving. "It's absolutely a good thing," he says. "We want to make Colorado the least friendly state to people who are here illegally."
In Hazleton, Pa., families started moving away after the city passed an illegal-immigrant law last summer, says Rudy Espinal, head of the Hazleton Hispanic Business Association. The law would fine landlords who rented to illegal immigrants and suspend the business licenses of companies that hired them. A companion measure would require tenants to register with the city and pay $10 for a rental permit.
A federal judge ruled the measures unconstitutional in July, but that hasn't stopped people moving away, he says.
"People are still leaving," Espinal says. "Some people have told me that they're leaving because they don't want their kids to grow up in an environment like this."
Hazleton Mayor Lou Barletta counters that some illegal immigrants who moved came back after the judge's decision, which the city is appealing. "I see a reversal," he says. "In a small city, it becomes obvious. … Schools are overcrowded and there are five-hour waits in the emergency room."
He says, "We don't want to chase immigrants away, just the illegal aliens who are causing many of the problem we are having."
------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
This is clear proof that deportation through attrition does and will work.
Democrats (& some Republicans) are underestimating the number of American citizens of BOTH parties that are outraged over any type of amnesty for lawbreakers/illegal aliens. In their rabid lust for post amnesty appreciative voters, the Dems have forgotten that illegal immigration hits lower income and minority American citizens & LEGAL aliens the hardest. You know who I mean - the people who do those jobs Americans WANT and HAVE to do based on their education and skills levels. NOT those who have no worries about an illegal taking over their job or won't feel the negative effects of their wages plummeting because of a surge of illegal immigrant labor flooding into that worker's hometown.
Hopefully some of you out there will remember that a main Democratic AND Liberal cause USED to be protection for the lower & mid-lower income AMERICAN CITIZEN workers. In turn these workers supported the Democratic Party through thick and thin only to be quickly cast aside as the Democrats greedily pander to illegals for votes.
When did supporting American workers become something bad?? I feel far more responsibility towards my fellow Americans--don't you?. I refuse to be ashamed of my allegiance for the American workers. Mexico has a plethora of problems it could fix if the country's politicians & wealthy were so motivated - but they care so little about their fellow countrymen that they'd rather export their poor by the millions rather than make a better life for them in Mexico. Isn't that what pro illegal aliens and opend border activists want us to do?? == Sacrifice our workers so the rich get richer and the American Dream becomes nothing more than an illusion for our hard working American citizens? Because once you ditch our American citizen workers that is exactly what you will get -- and it will result in the ruination of the American lower and middle class.
If they don't like the environment, let them go back where they came from and then become an immigrant the legal way.
http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3652821&page=1
Sgt. Helps Give Iraqi Girl the Gift of Sight
Doctors Completed Surgery on Zahraa's Right Eye This Month
During his tour of duty in Iraq, Army Sgt. Johnny Kempen thought he'd seen everything, until he met a little girl who saw nothing at all.
Kempen noticed one day, as soldiers threw candy to children in a tense Baghdad neighborhood, a little girl standing out.
"Watching her trying to get the candy and not being able to get it, it was like watching a kitten or something trying to do it," he said. "It was hard to watch."
She was a 7-year-old girl named Zahraa, who was born with painful blistered corneas. After learning about her condition, Kempen decided he wanted to help. So he enlisted help from the tiny town of Crandon, Wis., close to where he grew up.
Giving the Gift of Sight
Even the town's smallest residents were big donors. Many of Crandon Elementary School's students donated funds to help Zahraa get her eyes repaired.
"I wanted to help because everyone deserves to see and have a good life," said fifth-grader Rayfield Tallier.
Another student imagined how difficult it would be for a child to be blind in the midst of a war.
"If it was on my street, I would just imagine me sitting in the corner crying, being scared for my life," said student Maisen West.
The students were able to raise $400 for Zahraa's cause. The local Lions Club raised an additional $7,000 and flew Zahraa and her grandmother to Wisconsin for the procedure.
The Eye Clinic of Wisconsin, located in Wausau, Wis., performed the corneal transplant surgery for free.
"Just think about it. That little girl is going to have the gift of sight," said Frank Bocek of the Crandon Lions Club.
Doctors operated on Zahraa's right eye earlier this month and plan operating on the left eye next month.
Afterward, Zahraa will fly home to Iraq. Her grandmother said she is eager to get home so she can see her mother and father for the first time.
"It's a miracle," Zahraa's grandmother said through a translator. "She will be very happy to see her friends, her family, her mother, her father, because she didn't have the chance to see the [facial] features. She doesn't know [what] they look like."
She and Zahraa thanked Kempen and everyone who helped give Zahraa the gift of sight.
Now, Kempen said he believes Zahraa will have very different and positive future.
"She'll be able to go to school and she will have a chance at life," he said.
----------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
What a wonderful, inspiring story. Our soldiers are true heros. The American people should be proud to have such good men and women protecting us.
Sgt. Helps Give Iraqi Girl the Gift of Sight
Doctors Completed Surgery on Zahraa's Right Eye This Month
During his tour of duty in Iraq, Army Sgt. Johnny Kempen thought he'd seen everything, until he met a little girl who saw nothing at all.
Kempen noticed one day, as soldiers threw candy to children in a tense Baghdad neighborhood, a little girl standing out.
"Watching her trying to get the candy and not being able to get it, it was like watching a kitten or something trying to do it," he said. "It was hard to watch."
She was a 7-year-old girl named Zahraa, who was born with painful blistered corneas. After learning about her condition, Kempen decided he wanted to help. So he enlisted help from the tiny town of Crandon, Wis., close to where he grew up.
Giving the Gift of Sight
Even the town's smallest residents were big donors. Many of Crandon Elementary School's students donated funds to help Zahraa get her eyes repaired.
"I wanted to help because everyone deserves to see and have a good life," said fifth-grader Rayfield Tallier.
Another student imagined how difficult it would be for a child to be blind in the midst of a war.
"If it was on my street, I would just imagine me sitting in the corner crying, being scared for my life," said student Maisen West.
The students were able to raise $400 for Zahraa's cause. The local Lions Club raised an additional $7,000 and flew Zahraa and her grandmother to Wisconsin for the procedure.
The Eye Clinic of Wisconsin, located in Wausau, Wis., performed the corneal transplant surgery for free.
"Just think about it. That little girl is going to have the gift of sight," said Frank Bocek of the Crandon Lions Club.
Doctors operated on Zahraa's right eye earlier this month and plan operating on the left eye next month.
Afterward, Zahraa will fly home to Iraq. Her grandmother said she is eager to get home so she can see her mother and father for the first time.
"It's a miracle," Zahraa's grandmother said through a translator. "She will be very happy to see her friends, her family, her mother, her father, because she didn't have the chance to see the [facial] features. She doesn't know [what] they look like."
She and Zahraa thanked Kempen and everyone who helped give Zahraa the gift of sight.
Now, Kempen said he believes Zahraa will have very different and positive future.
"She'll be able to go to school and she will have a chance at life," he said.
----------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
What a wonderful, inspiring story. Our soldiers are true heros. The American people should be proud to have such good men and women protecting us.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57872
Kennedy 'humiliates' soldiers to further homosexual rights
Claim military rife with 'bigotry' used to justify hate-crimes amendment to defense spending bill
Posted: September 27, 2007
8:30 p.m. Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.
Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., have trashed the collective reputations of millions of U.S. military service members in order to advance their "hate crimes" legislation, which would make it a crime to utter a negative opinion about homosexuals or their lifestyle, a pro-family group says.
The U.S. Senate yesterday approved an amendment by Kennedy and Smith to install in federal law a ban on such expressions of religious and personal opinion. The amendment was added to the Department of Defense Authorization bill, which is needed to keep funding worldwide U.S. military operations.
"[The] senators humiliate[d] our brave men and women in uniform by alleging that America's military is a haven for bigots committing 'hate crimes'," said Wendy Wright, the president of Concerned Women for America.
"The Defense Authorization bill has been twisted to shamelessly smear our military. Alleged crimes by military members are already prosecuted, so the point of an amendment accusing military members of committing 'hate crimes' is to create the perception that America's military is rife with violent bigots," Wright said.
"It's extremely telling that Sens. Kennedy and Smith had to go back to 1992 to find an example to exploit (the already-prosecuted case of Navy seaman Allan Schindler) to claim that a federal law must be passed to address rampant bigotry in the military," added Shari Rendall, director of legislation and public policy for CWA.
"Sens. Kennedy and Smith are shamelessly impugning the character of our brave soldiers in an effort to push their agenda, forcing President Bush to veto legislation that is crucial to America's national security," she added.
The "hate crimes" plan has been afloat in Congress for a number of years, and in recent months had percolated to the top of the agenda for many representatives and senators who advocate for homosexuals.
To make the plan pertinent to the military spending plan, the senators cited the immediate need for such remedies in the military.
"As I have said in the past, the military is not immune to the scourge of hate crimes in our country. In 1992, Navy seaman Allen Schindler was brutally murdered by his shipmate Terry Helvey in Okinawa, Japan," Smith said.
The CWA noted that Smith neglected to add that Helvey was convicted of his crime and now is serving a life sentence in prison.
Kennedy's suggestion for a reason to support the "hate crimes" plan was a different case, in which a prosecution already has begun. Yet, he said, "We cannot let another day, really hours, go by without this legislation," the CWA said.
The Senate on a 60-39 vote added the amendment that expands hate crime laws to include crimes motivated by gender or "sexual orientation."
Opponents said the "hate crimes" plan ultimately will fail. "The president is not going to agree to this social legislation on the defense authorization bill. This bill will get vetoed," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
"I think it's shameful we're changing the subject to take care of special interest legislation at a time like this," added Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.
Other senators argued that the federal government should continue to allow states to prosecute crimes.
"Absent a clear demonstration that the states have failed in their law-enforcement responsibilities, the federalization of hate crimes is premature," said Sen. Orrin hatch, R-Utah.
The White House already has expressed concern that there already are local and state laws that address such crimes, and the federal law is unnecessary.
The "hate crimes" rules were passed as a separate measure in the U.S. House this year, but Bush previously has indicated such a proposal would result in a veto.
The issue of such legislation has Christians, conservatives, constitutionalists and 1st Amendment advocates in the United States alarmed.
Said the CWA in an analysis of the plan: "We live in a world where even the Bible is being deemed 'hate' literature. Christians have already been jailed for upholding traditional morality in public places, and if hate crime laws proliferate, the freedom to speak one's mind will be limited to those who celebrate and promote homosexuality."
Already in the United States, Catholic Charities of Boston halted all adoption operations in the state after being told under Massachusetts' pro-'gay' nondiscrimination law, only agencies that placed children in homosexual-led households would get licensed by the state.
The www.StopHateCrimesNow.com website features the testimonies of those who have had first-hand experience with local so-called "hate crimes" laws in the United States. A 75-year-old grandmother describes how she was jailed for testifying about the Bible.
The CWA has cited several Canadian cases, where such legislation already is law. There Dr. Laura Schelssinger already has been rebuked and James Dobson's "Focus on the Family" and the late Jerry Falwell's "Old Time Gospel Hour have been warned after broadcasting their religious opinions about homosexuality.
Schlessinger's opinions about homosexuality violated the human rights provision of the Canadian Association of Broadcasters' code of ethics, the nation's Broadcast Standards Council determined.
"It is the view of the Councils [two regional councils weighed in with the same verdict] that what the host may innocently describe as 'opinion' in fact and in law amounts to abusively discriminatory comment based on the sexual orientation of the identifiable group about which those statements were made," the organization concluded in censuring Schlessinger.
"It is the view of the Councils that the host's argument that she can 'surgically' separate the individual persons from their inherent characteristics so as to entitle her to make comments about the sexuality which have no effect on the person is fatuous and unsustainable," it added. "The sexual practices of gays and lesbians are as much a part of their being as the color of one's skin or the gender, religion, age or ethnicity of an individual."
"All that matters [under such plans] are the delicate feelings of members of federally protected groups," Michael Marcavage of RepentAmerica.com, has told WND. "Truth is not allowed as evidence in hate crimes trials. … A homosexual can claim emotional damage from hearing Scripture that describes his lifestyle as an abomination. He can press charges against the pastor or broadcaster who merely reads the Bible in public. The 'hater' can be fined thousands of dollars and even imprisoned!"
Peter LaBarbera, of Americans for Truth, noted that in Canada and France both, legislators have been fined for publicly criticizing homosexuality. Three years ago, a Swedish hate crimes law was used to put Pastor Ake Green, who preached that homosexuality is a sin, in jail for a month.
"And recently, a British couple told how they were denied the chance to adopt because it was determined that their Christian faith might 'prejudice' them against a homosexual child put in their care," LaBarbera added.
In England, the CWA reported, Anglican Bishop Rev. Dr. Peter Forster of Chester was investigated by police for saying homosexuals "could and should seek medical help to 'reorient' themselves."
London Telegraph columnist Peter Simple then warned: "That the bishop should be threatened with prosecution for a perfectly reasonable, if debatable, suggestion will strike people still in their senses as a bad joke, a case of that stale old cliché, 'political correctness gone mad.' Unfortunately it is much more serious than that. Here are the unmistakable beginnings of state thought control."
------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Boy oh boy.... So hate crime now inhibits our freedom of speech. Great, I can't wait to see what piss poor service Kennedy brings to the American people next.
Kennedy 'humiliates' soldiers to further homosexual rights
Claim military rife with 'bigotry' used to justify hate-crimes amendment to defense spending bill
Posted: September 27, 2007
8:30 p.m. Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.
Sens. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and Gordon Smith, R-Ore., have trashed the collective reputations of millions of U.S. military service members in order to advance their "hate crimes" legislation, which would make it a crime to utter a negative opinion about homosexuals or their lifestyle, a pro-family group says.
The U.S. Senate yesterday approved an amendment by Kennedy and Smith to install in federal law a ban on such expressions of religious and personal opinion. The amendment was added to the Department of Defense Authorization bill, which is needed to keep funding worldwide U.S. military operations.
"[The] senators humiliate[d] our brave men and women in uniform by alleging that America's military is a haven for bigots committing 'hate crimes'," said Wendy Wright, the president of Concerned Women for America.
"The Defense Authorization bill has been twisted to shamelessly smear our military. Alleged crimes by military members are already prosecuted, so the point of an amendment accusing military members of committing 'hate crimes' is to create the perception that America's military is rife with violent bigots," Wright said.
"It's extremely telling that Sens. Kennedy and Smith had to go back to 1992 to find an example to exploit (the already-prosecuted case of Navy seaman Allan Schindler) to claim that a federal law must be passed to address rampant bigotry in the military," added Shari Rendall, director of legislation and public policy for CWA.
"Sens. Kennedy and Smith are shamelessly impugning the character of our brave soldiers in an effort to push their agenda, forcing President Bush to veto legislation that is crucial to America's national security," she added.
The "hate crimes" plan has been afloat in Congress for a number of years, and in recent months had percolated to the top of the agenda for many representatives and senators who advocate for homosexuals.
To make the plan pertinent to the military spending plan, the senators cited the immediate need for such remedies in the military.
"As I have said in the past, the military is not immune to the scourge of hate crimes in our country. In 1992, Navy seaman Allen Schindler was brutally murdered by his shipmate Terry Helvey in Okinawa, Japan," Smith said.
The CWA noted that Smith neglected to add that Helvey was convicted of his crime and now is serving a life sentence in prison.
Kennedy's suggestion for a reason to support the "hate crimes" plan was a different case, in which a prosecution already has begun. Yet, he said, "We cannot let another day, really hours, go by without this legislation," the CWA said.
The Senate on a 60-39 vote added the amendment that expands hate crime laws to include crimes motivated by gender or "sexual orientation."
Opponents said the "hate crimes" plan ultimately will fail. "The president is not going to agree to this social legislation on the defense authorization bill. This bill will get vetoed," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
"I think it's shameful we're changing the subject to take care of special interest legislation at a time like this," added Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas.
Other senators argued that the federal government should continue to allow states to prosecute crimes.
"Absent a clear demonstration that the states have failed in their law-enforcement responsibilities, the federalization of hate crimes is premature," said Sen. Orrin hatch, R-Utah.
The White House already has expressed concern that there already are local and state laws that address such crimes, and the federal law is unnecessary.
The "hate crimes" rules were passed as a separate measure in the U.S. House this year, but Bush previously has indicated such a proposal would result in a veto.
The issue of such legislation has Christians, conservatives, constitutionalists and 1st Amendment advocates in the United States alarmed.
Said the CWA in an analysis of the plan: "We live in a world where even the Bible is being deemed 'hate' literature. Christians have already been jailed for upholding traditional morality in public places, and if hate crime laws proliferate, the freedom to speak one's mind will be limited to those who celebrate and promote homosexuality."
Already in the United States, Catholic Charities of Boston halted all adoption operations in the state after being told under Massachusetts' pro-'gay' nondiscrimination law, only agencies that placed children in homosexual-led households would get licensed by the state.
The www.StopHateCrimesNow.com website features the testimonies of those who have had first-hand experience with local so-called "hate crimes" laws in the United States. A 75-year-old grandmother describes how she was jailed for testifying about the Bible.
The CWA has cited several Canadian cases, where such legislation already is law. There Dr. Laura Schelssinger already has been rebuked and James Dobson's "Focus on the Family" and the late Jerry Falwell's "Old Time Gospel Hour have been warned after broadcasting their religious opinions about homosexuality.
Schlessinger's opinions about homosexuality violated the human rights provision of the Canadian Association of Broadcasters' code of ethics, the nation's Broadcast Standards Council determined.
"It is the view of the Councils [two regional councils weighed in with the same verdict] that what the host may innocently describe as 'opinion' in fact and in law amounts to abusively discriminatory comment based on the sexual orientation of the identifiable group about which those statements were made," the organization concluded in censuring Schlessinger.
"It is the view of the Councils that the host's argument that she can 'surgically' separate the individual persons from their inherent characteristics so as to entitle her to make comments about the sexuality which have no effect on the person is fatuous and unsustainable," it added. "The sexual practices of gays and lesbians are as much a part of their being as the color of one's skin or the gender, religion, age or ethnicity of an individual."
"All that matters [under such plans] are the delicate feelings of members of federally protected groups," Michael Marcavage of RepentAmerica.com, has told WND. "Truth is not allowed as evidence in hate crimes trials. … A homosexual can claim emotional damage from hearing Scripture that describes his lifestyle as an abomination. He can press charges against the pastor or broadcaster who merely reads the Bible in public. The 'hater' can be fined thousands of dollars and even imprisoned!"
Peter LaBarbera, of Americans for Truth, noted that in Canada and France both, legislators have been fined for publicly criticizing homosexuality. Three years ago, a Swedish hate crimes law was used to put Pastor Ake Green, who preached that homosexuality is a sin, in jail for a month.
"And recently, a British couple told how they were denied the chance to adopt because it was determined that their Christian faith might 'prejudice' them against a homosexual child put in their care," LaBarbera added.
In England, the CWA reported, Anglican Bishop Rev. Dr. Peter Forster of Chester was investigated by police for saying homosexuals "could and should seek medical help to 'reorient' themselves."
London Telegraph columnist Peter Simple then warned: "That the bishop should be threatened with prosecution for a perfectly reasonable, if debatable, suggestion will strike people still in their senses as a bad joke, a case of that stale old cliché, 'political correctness gone mad.' Unfortunately it is much more serious than that. Here are the unmistakable beginnings of state thought control."
------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Boy oh boy.... So hate crime now inhibits our freedom of speech. Great, I can't wait to see what piss poor service Kennedy brings to the American people next.
Spokeswoman dodges question about NAFTA Superhighways
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57875
Spokeswoman dodges question about NAFTA Superhighways
Perino says president 'comfortable' working with Mexico, Canada
Posted: September 28, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
President Bush is comfortable when the United States, Mexico and Canada work together on issues facing the continent, according to spokeswoman Dana Perino, even though Congress is considering a warning that the nation's sovereignty could be threaten by such efforts.
She was responding to a question from Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House. He asked: "Inspired in part by The New York Times best-selling book, "The Late Great U.S.A.," a resolution in the House of Representatives opposing work on any NAFTA superhighway or moves towards merging the U.S., Mexico and Canada into a North American union now has 27 co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle. Do you support such legislation?"
"I've not heard of such legislation, but I think we are very comfortable believing that there can be Mexico, the United States and Canada as three separate countries all working together," was her full response.
The pending resolution expresses "the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada."
It was launched by U.S. Reps. Virgil Goode, R-Va., Ron Paul, R-Texas, Walter B. Jones, R-N.C., and Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., and has been referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, in addition to the Committee on International Relations.
Nearly two dozen others now have joined with the effort, which says:
Whereas, according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly widened since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA);
Whereas the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA;
Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union;
Whereas it would be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would increase the insurance rates for American drivers;
Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities; and
Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would be funded by foreign consortiums and controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That –
the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System;
the United States should not enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and
the President should indicate strong opposition to these or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.
WNDN previously has reported the resolution is a message to both the executive and legislative branches.
"You won't hear the leadership in the Republic Party admit it, but there are many in the House and Senate who know that illegal immigration has to be stopped and legal immigration has to be reduced. We are giving away the country so a few very rich people can get richer," Goode told WND.
How did he react when President Bush referred to those who suggest the Security and Prosperity Partnership could turn into the North American Union as "conspiracy theorists"?
"The president is really engaging in a play on words," Goode responded. "The secretary of transportation came before our subcommittee," he explained, "and I had the opportunity to ask her some questions about the NAFTA Superhighway. Of course, she answered, 'There's no NAFTA Superhighway.' But then Mary Peters proceeded to discuss the road system that would come up from Mexico and go through the United States up into Canada."
Goode is a member of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development of the House Committee on Appropriations.
"So, I think that saying we're 'conspiracy theorists' or something like that is really just a play on words with the intent to demonize the opposition," Goode concluded.
Goode stressed that the Bush administration supports both a NAU regional government and a NAFTA Superhighway system: "The Bush administration as well as Mexico and Canada have persons in the government in all three countries who want to a see a North American Union as well as a highway system that would bring goods into the west coast of Mexico and transport them up through Mexico into the United States and then in onto Canada," Goode confirmed.
The Virginia congressman said he believes the motivation behind the movement toward North American integration is the anticipated profits the large multinational corporations in each of the three countries expect to make from global trade, especially moving production to China.
"Some really large businesses that get a lot from China would like a NAFTA Superhighway system because it would reduce costs for them to transport containers from China and, as a result, increase their margins," he argued.
"I am vigorously opposed to the Mexican trucks coming into the country," Goode continued. "The way we have done it and, I think, the way we should do it in the future, is to have the goods come into the United States from Mexico within a 20-mile commercial space and unloaded from Mexican trucks into U.S. trucks. This procedure enhances the safety of the country, the security of the country, and provides much less chance for illegal immigration."
In a second question Kinsolving asked: "Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Duncan Hunter's Restoring Patriotism to America's Campuses Act would bar Columbia University from receiving any federal money because it not only refuses to allow an ROTC on campus, but also because it invited [Iranian President Mahmoud} Ahmadinejad as a guest lecturer. And my question: Does the president believe that is right, or wrong?'
"I haven't seen the legislation. And we have already said that Columbia University made its own decision," Perino said
Spokeswoman dodges question about NAFTA Superhighways
Perino says president 'comfortable' working with Mexico, Canada
Posted: September 28, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
President Bush is comfortable when the United States, Mexico and Canada work together on issues facing the continent, according to spokeswoman Dana Perino, even though Congress is considering a warning that the nation's sovereignty could be threaten by such efforts.
She was responding to a question from Les Kinsolving, WND's correspondent at the White House. He asked: "Inspired in part by The New York Times best-selling book, "The Late Great U.S.A.," a resolution in the House of Representatives opposing work on any NAFTA superhighway or moves towards merging the U.S., Mexico and Canada into a North American union now has 27 co-sponsors from both sides of the aisle. Do you support such legislation?"
"I've not heard of such legislation, but I think we are very comfortable believing that there can be Mexico, the United States and Canada as three separate countries all working together," was her full response.
The pending resolution expresses "the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada."
It was launched by U.S. Reps. Virgil Goode, R-Va., Ron Paul, R-Texas, Walter B. Jones, R-N.C., and Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., and has been referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, in addition to the Committee on International Relations.
Nearly two dozen others now have joined with the effort, which says:
Whereas, according to the Department of Commerce, United States trade deficits with Mexico and Canada have significantly widened since the implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA);
Whereas the economic and physical security of the United States is impaired by the potential loss of control of its borders attendant to the full operation of NAFTA;
Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System from the west coast of Mexico through the United States and into Canada has been suggested as part of a North American Union;
Whereas it would be particularly difficult for Americans to collect insurance from Mexican companies which employ Mexican drivers involved in accidents in the United States, which would increase the insurance rates for American drivers;
Whereas future unrestricted foreign trucking into the United States can pose a safety hazard due to inadequate maintenance and inspection, and can act collaterally as a conduit for the entry into the United States of illegal drugs, illegal human smuggling, and terrorist activities; and
Whereas a NAFTA Superhighway System would be funded by foreign consortiums and controlled by foreign management, which threatens the sovereignty of the United States: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That –
the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System;
the United States should not enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada; and
the President should indicate strong opposition to these or any other proposals that threaten the sovereignty of the United States.
WNDN previously has reported the resolution is a message to both the executive and legislative branches.
"You won't hear the leadership in the Republic Party admit it, but there are many in the House and Senate who know that illegal immigration has to be stopped and legal immigration has to be reduced. We are giving away the country so a few very rich people can get richer," Goode told WND.
How did he react when President Bush referred to those who suggest the Security and Prosperity Partnership could turn into the North American Union as "conspiracy theorists"?
"The president is really engaging in a play on words," Goode responded. "The secretary of transportation came before our subcommittee," he explained, "and I had the opportunity to ask her some questions about the NAFTA Superhighway. Of course, she answered, 'There's no NAFTA Superhighway.' But then Mary Peters proceeded to discuss the road system that would come up from Mexico and go through the United States up into Canada."
Goode is a member of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development of the House Committee on Appropriations.
"So, I think that saying we're 'conspiracy theorists' or something like that is really just a play on words with the intent to demonize the opposition," Goode concluded.
Goode stressed that the Bush administration supports both a NAU regional government and a NAFTA Superhighway system: "The Bush administration as well as Mexico and Canada have persons in the government in all three countries who want to a see a North American Union as well as a highway system that would bring goods into the west coast of Mexico and transport them up through Mexico into the United States and then in onto Canada," Goode confirmed.
The Virginia congressman said he believes the motivation behind the movement toward North American integration is the anticipated profits the large multinational corporations in each of the three countries expect to make from global trade, especially moving production to China.
"Some really large businesses that get a lot from China would like a NAFTA Superhighway system because it would reduce costs for them to transport containers from China and, as a result, increase their margins," he argued.
"I am vigorously opposed to the Mexican trucks coming into the country," Goode continued. "The way we have done it and, I think, the way we should do it in the future, is to have the goods come into the United States from Mexico within a 20-mile commercial space and unloaded from Mexican trucks into U.S. trucks. This procedure enhances the safety of the country, the security of the country, and provides much less chance for illegal immigration."
In a second question Kinsolving asked: "Republican Congressman and presidential candidate Duncan Hunter's Restoring Patriotism to America's Campuses Act would bar Columbia University from receiving any federal money because it not only refuses to allow an ROTC on campus, but also because it invited [Iranian President Mahmoud} Ahmadinejad as a guest lecturer. And my question: Does the president believe that is right, or wrong?'
"I haven't seen the legislation. And we have already said that Columbia University made its own decision," Perino said
Washington changes its tune on climate
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9fe5b5aa-6d33-11dc-ab19-0000779fd2ac.html
Washington changes its tune on climate
Published: September 27 2007 21:28 | Last updated: September 27 2007 21:28
The world must cut emissions or sacrifice the planet, Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, told a meeting of governments on Thursday, in the most strongly worded statement on global warming yet made by the US administration.
She told representatives of 16 governments gathered for talks on climate change in Washington: “It is our responsibility as global leaders to forge a new international consensus on how to solve climate change . . . If we stay on our present path, we face an unacceptable choice: either we sacrifice global economic growth to secure the health of our planet or we sacrifice the health of our planet to continue with fossil-fuelled growth.”
She asked the governments present, which account for more than 80 per cent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, to agree a long-term goal on emissions reduction, establish mid-term targets for the same and to help develop markets for low-carbon technologies.
Her words reflected how far US rhetoric on climate change has moved in the past six months.
President George W. Bush, who rejected the Kyoto protocol, had previously called into question the state of scientific knowledge on global warming, and the US has been seen by other governments as holding up progress on international talks.
His decision to host a meeting of big emitters took the world by surprise.The two-day meeting, which finishes on Friday, is intended to be the first in a series whose conclusions will next year be included in the United Nations process on finding a successor to the Kyoto protocol when its main provisions expire in 2012.
Despite the newly warm rhetoric on the climate, however, stark differences remain between the US and other countries which are unlikely to be resolved in this meeting. For instance, the US did not table a proposal for what the long-term goal on emissions cuts should be, suggesting that it sees the issue of emissions targets as contentious.
Yvo de Boer, executive director of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, told the Financial Times: “It’s difficult to organise a meeting to ask others to come up with proposals but not make one yourself.”
Mr de Boer said that despite differences, the US decision to hold a meeting was “a very useful, positive contribution” to international progress on tackling climate change.
He told the meeting that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN-convened body of the world’s leading climate scientists, had concluded that emissions needed to peak in 10-15 years and be halved by 2050, compared with 1990 levels.
Another point of contention is whether reduction goals should be set by international treaty, such as a successor to the Kyoto protocol, or at a national level.
Ms Rice indicated that goals on emissions cuts should be set at a national level rather than being international in scope.
She said: “Every country will make its own decisions, reflecting its own needs and its own interests [and] tackle climate change in the ways that they deem best”.
The US also favours voluntary targets for cuts rather than legally binding commitments.
But the UN argues that the best way to cut emissions is through a market in carbon dioxide, which would put a price on emissions and enable poor countries to gain access to finance for clean technology, and which, for its proper working, would require medium- and long-term legally binding commitments to cut emissions.
“Voluntary targets are a waste of time,” Phil Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust, a US lobby group, said.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Blah, Blah, Blah.... Global Warming my butt.
Washington changes its tune on climate
Published: September 27 2007 21:28 | Last updated: September 27 2007 21:28
The world must cut emissions or sacrifice the planet, Condoleezza Rice, US secretary of state, told a meeting of governments on Thursday, in the most strongly worded statement on global warming yet made by the US administration.
She told representatives of 16 governments gathered for talks on climate change in Washington: “It is our responsibility as global leaders to forge a new international consensus on how to solve climate change . . . If we stay on our present path, we face an unacceptable choice: either we sacrifice global economic growth to secure the health of our planet or we sacrifice the health of our planet to continue with fossil-fuelled growth.”
She asked the governments present, which account for more than 80 per cent of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions, to agree a long-term goal on emissions reduction, establish mid-term targets for the same and to help develop markets for low-carbon technologies.
Her words reflected how far US rhetoric on climate change has moved in the past six months.
President George W. Bush, who rejected the Kyoto protocol, had previously called into question the state of scientific knowledge on global warming, and the US has been seen by other governments as holding up progress on international talks.
His decision to host a meeting of big emitters took the world by surprise.The two-day meeting, which finishes on Friday, is intended to be the first in a series whose conclusions will next year be included in the United Nations process on finding a successor to the Kyoto protocol when its main provisions expire in 2012.
Despite the newly warm rhetoric on the climate, however, stark differences remain between the US and other countries which are unlikely to be resolved in this meeting. For instance, the US did not table a proposal for what the long-term goal on emissions cuts should be, suggesting that it sees the issue of emissions targets as contentious.
Yvo de Boer, executive director of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, told the Financial Times: “It’s difficult to organise a meeting to ask others to come up with proposals but not make one yourself.”
Mr de Boer said that despite differences, the US decision to hold a meeting was “a very useful, positive contribution” to international progress on tackling climate change.
He told the meeting that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the UN-convened body of the world’s leading climate scientists, had concluded that emissions needed to peak in 10-15 years and be halved by 2050, compared with 1990 levels.
Another point of contention is whether reduction goals should be set by international treaty, such as a successor to the Kyoto protocol, or at a national level.
Ms Rice indicated that goals on emissions cuts should be set at a national level rather than being international in scope.
She said: “Every country will make its own decisions, reflecting its own needs and its own interests [and] tackle climate change in the ways that they deem best”.
The US also favours voluntary targets for cuts rather than legally binding commitments.
But the UN argues that the best way to cut emissions is through a market in carbon dioxide, which would put a price on emissions and enable poor countries to gain access to finance for clean technology, and which, for its proper working, would require medium- and long-term legally binding commitments to cut emissions.
“Voluntary targets are a waste of time,” Phil Clapp, president of the National Environmental Trust, a US lobby group, said.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Blah, Blah, Blah.... Global Warming my butt.
Mexico becoming one of world's more dangerous countries
http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070923/NEWS01/709230373/1002/NEWS01
Mexico becoming one of world's more dangerous countries
September 23, 2007
By Jay Root McClatchy Newspapers
MEXICO CITY — Mexican President Felipe Calderon's tough new war on drug trafficking, which has sent thousands of Mexican Army troops into the countryside and a record number of drug suspects to the United States for trial, failed to quell violence in the first half of the year.
Federal crimes such as gangland-style murders and kidnappings have reached record levels, according to a new report from Mexico's Congress, making Mexico one of the world's most dangerous countries.
One analyst who worked on the report said Mexico's murder rate now tops all others in the Western Hemisphere.
"In a global context, we suffer from more homicides, that is to say, violent deaths, than any other region in the world except for certain regions on the African continent," said Eduardo Rojas, who helped put together the crime report at the Center for Social and Public Opinion Studies, a research arm of the Mexico's Chamber of Deputies.
The report, made public last week, said that major federal crimes, which include homicides, kidnappings and arms trafficking, rose 25 percent in the first half of 2007 over the same period last year. In 2006, the same crimes had risen 22 percent over the previous year.
Gangland style executions have risen 155 percent since 2001, according to the congressional report.
Crime has been on the rise in Mexico throughout the last decade as drug cartels battle for control of lucrative smuggling routes. But the new findings come at a politically charged time for the Calderon administration, which is also confronting a new threat from an old foe — the shadowy Popular Revolutionary Army or EPR, its Spanish acronym.
EPR's coordinated bombings of natural gas pipelines, first in July and then in September, have exposed government intelligence failures and the vulnerability of the petroleum infrastructure in Mexico, the second largest oil exporter to the United States.
"The reality is the government has been pursuing the top EPR leaders for at least five years, and they haven't been able to catch them," said Mexican political commentator Raymundo Riva Palacio.
The attacks have been unexpectedly sophisticated. The September blasts caused millions of dollars in economic losses when the state-owned oil company, Pemex, had to cut off gas supplies to thousands of businesses, including major multi-national companies such as Grupo Modelo, the makers of Corona beer, and Vitro, the largest glassmaker in the world.
"These people that are placing these devices know something about the flow of the oil and gas," said one American official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly. "They didn't just place it randomly in the middle of the valve system."
Experts believe the EPR, a Marxist group that traces its origins to the armed guerilla movements of the 1970s, finances its activities with ransom from kidnapped businessmen. The guerillas say the attacks will continue until authorities release two comrades who disappeared in Oaxaca in May; state and federal officials say they're not in government custody.
The group's reach appears to be countrywide. The first blasts struck multiple locations in central Mexico. The second set hit coastal Veracruz. On Wednesday, security was beefed up around pipelines in northern Chihuahua state after EPR graffiti was discovered on installations there.
Mexican Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora recently told reporters that the guerrilla bombings "distract" authorities from their battle against organized crime.
Calderon, who took office in December after a contentious election that saw him win with less than a third of the vote, had vowed to curb Mexico's drug violence.
In January, he ordered a huge military and legal offensive, sending more than 20,000 soldiers to hot spots throughout the country and dropping Mexico's traditional hesitancy to send accused drug traffickers to face charges in the United States. By August his administration had extradited a record 64 accused drug traffickers.
The offensive won praise from the Bush administration and Mexicans, but gangland-style executions have surged, with the report counting 1,588 in the first half of 2007. For the full year of 2001, there were 1,080 such crimes, the report said.
Mexico's violence is often spectacular and lurid, with tales of street shootouts, decapitations and bomb blasts often filling Mexico's news pages and airwaves. No place is immune, including the buildings of the country's news outlets.
In May a severed head wrapped in newspaper was left in a cooler outside the office of Tabasco Hoy in Villahermosa, where drug violence is on the rise. Grenades have been tossed into newsrooms from Cancun to Nuevo Laredo in the past 18 months. The Paris-based organization Reporters Without Borders reported that Mexico was the most dangerous country for journalists in 2006, after Iraq.
On May 14, suspected drug traffickers on motorcycles gunned down Jose Nemesio Lugo, a senior federal investigator in charge of gathering intelligence on drug traffickers, in Mexico City's upscale Coyoacan neighborhood. Two days later in Sonora state, about 20 miles south of Arizona, a five-hour shootout between heavily armed commandos and police left 20 people dead.
The bloodbath continued unabated this month, with the assassinations of two state police chiefs. The first was Jaime Flores of San Luis Potosi state, shot in the head multiple times in front of his wife on Sept. 13. Then on Wednesday came news that Marcos Manuel Souberville, the state police chief in Hidalgo, had fallen in a hail of bullets during an afternoon drive-by shooting.
Many prominent Mexicans have sought refuge in the United States, but that is no guarantee of safety. Mario Espinoza Lobato, a businessman and city councilman from Ciudad Acuna, was gunned down Wednesday at his home in neighboring Del Rio, Texas, authorities said. He was an outspoken critic of the criminal gangs that he said had tried to kidnap him.
Kidnapping is a multi-million dollar industry in Mexico. The report from Congress indicates there are about 4,500 kidnappings a year, about a third of which are reported.
Greg Bangs, head of the kidnapping and ransom unit at the Chubb Group of Insurance Companies, said Mexico has rocketed past Colombia to become the world's ransom capital.
"Mexico is now very definitely No. 1 in the world in terms of the numbers of kidnappings," Bangs said. "Kidnappers are indicating how serious they are by sending parts of ears and noses and fingers and various bodily parts . . . they didn't used to do that so much, but that seems to be more prevalent."
Top officials here continue to insist their efforts are paying off even if the numbers don't show it. At a news conference last week, Medina, the attorney general, told reporters "there is a decrease" in organized crime murders.
But then Medina provided figures for "violent execution" in January and February — 175 and 208, respectively.
"They're going down?" one reporter asked.
"I wish they were lower than last year," Medina responded. "But in the first months of this year there were more than in the same period last year."
(EDITORS: STORY CAN END HERE)
Congressman Juan Francisco Rivera, chairman of the Chamber of Deputies Committee on Security, expressed confidence in the government's crime-fighting campaign. He said pointedly that Americans should not be so quick to judge Mexico.
He described the country's violent crime wave as temporary, while in "cities like Detroit, Houston or Dallas, it has become a permanent thing." Rivera also called on U.S. authorities to do more to stop illicit firearms exports.
"That's what is killing us," Rivera said. "I think if look at the number of arrests, the number of drug seizures, the number of policemen who have risked their lives and who have been killed, I think it shows that our Army and local police forces are engaged in a frontal battle."
———
MEXICO'S RISING CRIME RATE
The following chart shows the average number of serious federal crimes reported daily from 1998 to 2007.
Year Incidents Reported Daily
—1998 205.1
—1999 208.7
—2000 223.4
—2001 203.1
—2002 202.2
—2003 222.5
—2004 222.8
—2005 245.3
—2006 300.4
—2007 (Jan-Jun) 375.5
Source: Centro de Estudios Sociales y de Opinion Publica, Camara de Diputados, Mexico
———
FULL REPORT
For the full report, in Spanish, click on Reporte CESOP No. 4 at http://www3.diputados.gob.mx/camara/001 — diputados/006 — centros — de — estudio/04 — centro — de — estudios — sociales — y — de — opinion — publica/003 — accesos — directos/002 — publicaciones/006 — reporte — cesop
———
(c) 2007, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
Mexico becoming one of world's more dangerous countries
September 23, 2007
By Jay Root McClatchy Newspapers
MEXICO CITY — Mexican President Felipe Calderon's tough new war on drug trafficking, which has sent thousands of Mexican Army troops into the countryside and a record number of drug suspects to the United States for trial, failed to quell violence in the first half of the year.
Federal crimes such as gangland-style murders and kidnappings have reached record levels, according to a new report from Mexico's Congress, making Mexico one of the world's most dangerous countries.
One analyst who worked on the report said Mexico's murder rate now tops all others in the Western Hemisphere.
"In a global context, we suffer from more homicides, that is to say, violent deaths, than any other region in the world except for certain regions on the African continent," said Eduardo Rojas, who helped put together the crime report at the Center for Social and Public Opinion Studies, a research arm of the Mexico's Chamber of Deputies.
The report, made public last week, said that major federal crimes, which include homicides, kidnappings and arms trafficking, rose 25 percent in the first half of 2007 over the same period last year. In 2006, the same crimes had risen 22 percent over the previous year.
Gangland style executions have risen 155 percent since 2001, according to the congressional report.
Crime has been on the rise in Mexico throughout the last decade as drug cartels battle for control of lucrative smuggling routes. But the new findings come at a politically charged time for the Calderon administration, which is also confronting a new threat from an old foe — the shadowy Popular Revolutionary Army or EPR, its Spanish acronym.
EPR's coordinated bombings of natural gas pipelines, first in July and then in September, have exposed government intelligence failures and the vulnerability of the petroleum infrastructure in Mexico, the second largest oil exporter to the United States.
"The reality is the government has been pursuing the top EPR leaders for at least five years, and they haven't been able to catch them," said Mexican political commentator Raymundo Riva Palacio.
The attacks have been unexpectedly sophisticated. The September blasts caused millions of dollars in economic losses when the state-owned oil company, Pemex, had to cut off gas supplies to thousands of businesses, including major multi-national companies such as Grupo Modelo, the makers of Corona beer, and Vitro, the largest glassmaker in the world.
"These people that are placing these devices know something about the flow of the oil and gas," said one American official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly. "They didn't just place it randomly in the middle of the valve system."
Experts believe the EPR, a Marxist group that traces its origins to the armed guerilla movements of the 1970s, finances its activities with ransom from kidnapped businessmen. The guerillas say the attacks will continue until authorities release two comrades who disappeared in Oaxaca in May; state and federal officials say they're not in government custody.
The group's reach appears to be countrywide. The first blasts struck multiple locations in central Mexico. The second set hit coastal Veracruz. On Wednesday, security was beefed up around pipelines in northern Chihuahua state after EPR graffiti was discovered on installations there.
Mexican Attorney General Eduardo Medina Mora recently told reporters that the guerrilla bombings "distract" authorities from their battle against organized crime.
Calderon, who took office in December after a contentious election that saw him win with less than a third of the vote, had vowed to curb Mexico's drug violence.
In January, he ordered a huge military and legal offensive, sending more than 20,000 soldiers to hot spots throughout the country and dropping Mexico's traditional hesitancy to send accused drug traffickers to face charges in the United States. By August his administration had extradited a record 64 accused drug traffickers.
The offensive won praise from the Bush administration and Mexicans, but gangland-style executions have surged, with the report counting 1,588 in the first half of 2007. For the full year of 2001, there were 1,080 such crimes, the report said.
Mexico's violence is often spectacular and lurid, with tales of street shootouts, decapitations and bomb blasts often filling Mexico's news pages and airwaves. No place is immune, including the buildings of the country's news outlets.
In May a severed head wrapped in newspaper was left in a cooler outside the office of Tabasco Hoy in Villahermosa, where drug violence is on the rise. Grenades have been tossed into newsrooms from Cancun to Nuevo Laredo in the past 18 months. The Paris-based organization Reporters Without Borders reported that Mexico was the most dangerous country for journalists in 2006, after Iraq.
On May 14, suspected drug traffickers on motorcycles gunned down Jose Nemesio Lugo, a senior federal investigator in charge of gathering intelligence on drug traffickers, in Mexico City's upscale Coyoacan neighborhood. Two days later in Sonora state, about 20 miles south of Arizona, a five-hour shootout between heavily armed commandos and police left 20 people dead.
The bloodbath continued unabated this month, with the assassinations of two state police chiefs. The first was Jaime Flores of San Luis Potosi state, shot in the head multiple times in front of his wife on Sept. 13. Then on Wednesday came news that Marcos Manuel Souberville, the state police chief in Hidalgo, had fallen in a hail of bullets during an afternoon drive-by shooting.
Many prominent Mexicans have sought refuge in the United States, but that is no guarantee of safety. Mario Espinoza Lobato, a businessman and city councilman from Ciudad Acuna, was gunned down Wednesday at his home in neighboring Del Rio, Texas, authorities said. He was an outspoken critic of the criminal gangs that he said had tried to kidnap him.
Kidnapping is a multi-million dollar industry in Mexico. The report from Congress indicates there are about 4,500 kidnappings a year, about a third of which are reported.
Greg Bangs, head of the kidnapping and ransom unit at the Chubb Group of Insurance Companies, said Mexico has rocketed past Colombia to become the world's ransom capital.
"Mexico is now very definitely No. 1 in the world in terms of the numbers of kidnappings," Bangs said. "Kidnappers are indicating how serious they are by sending parts of ears and noses and fingers and various bodily parts . . . they didn't used to do that so much, but that seems to be more prevalent."
Top officials here continue to insist their efforts are paying off even if the numbers don't show it. At a news conference last week, Medina, the attorney general, told reporters "there is a decrease" in organized crime murders.
But then Medina provided figures for "violent execution" in January and February — 175 and 208, respectively.
"They're going down?" one reporter asked.
"I wish they were lower than last year," Medina responded. "But in the first months of this year there were more than in the same period last year."
(EDITORS: STORY CAN END HERE)
Congressman Juan Francisco Rivera, chairman of the Chamber of Deputies Committee on Security, expressed confidence in the government's crime-fighting campaign. He said pointedly that Americans should not be so quick to judge Mexico.
He described the country's violent crime wave as temporary, while in "cities like Detroit, Houston or Dallas, it has become a permanent thing." Rivera also called on U.S. authorities to do more to stop illicit firearms exports.
"That's what is killing us," Rivera said. "I think if look at the number of arrests, the number of drug seizures, the number of policemen who have risked their lives and who have been killed, I think it shows that our Army and local police forces are engaged in a frontal battle."
———
MEXICO'S RISING CRIME RATE
The following chart shows the average number of serious federal crimes reported daily from 1998 to 2007.
Year Incidents Reported Daily
—1998 205.1
—1999 208.7
—2000 223.4
—2001 203.1
—2002 202.2
—2003 222.5
—2004 222.8
—2005 245.3
—2006 300.4
—2007 (Jan-Jun) 375.5
Source: Centro de Estudios Sociales y de Opinion Publica, Camara de Diputados, Mexico
———
FULL REPORT
For the full report, in Spanish, click on Reporte CESOP No. 4 at http://www3.diputados.gob.mx/camara/001 — diputados/006 — centros — de — estudio/04 — centro — de — estudios — sociales — y — de — opinion — publica/003 — accesos — directos/002 — publicaciones/006 — reporte — cesop
———
(c) 2007, McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.
Nacy Pelosi Against Border Fence
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called a plan to build fencing along parts of the Mexico border a "terrible idea" that overlooks local communities.
"I have been against the fence, I thought it's a bad idea even when it was just a matter of discussion," said Pelosi, D-Calif. "These are communities where you have a border going through them, they are not communities where you have a fence splitting them."
Pelosi also touted legislation known as the DREAM Act that would make it easier for some illegal immigrants to receive higher education benefits. She spoke at a conference that drew more than 5,000 students for activities designed to inspire careers in science and technology.
The DREAM Act would eliminate a federal provision that discourages states from providing illegal immigrants with lower in-state tuition rates. It also would allow permanent residency for illegal immigrants who entered the country as children and have been admitted to an institution of higher education.
"It just isn't fair," Pelosi said. "Those young people who came to America one way or another ... their opportunities are curtailed because of the situation. And it's not only harmful to them — it's harmful to the country."
------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
"It just isn't fair," Pelosi said. I agree with you Ms. Pelosi.... It isn't fair to the millions of Americans fitting the bill for illegal immigrants. It isn't fair to true American college students who take on loans to pay for out-of-state tuition. It isn't fair to circumvent the will of the American people who wants these illegals out, and for them to take their moeny sucking spawn with them.
"I have been against the fence, I thought it's a bad idea even when it was just a matter of discussion," said Pelosi, D-Calif. "These are communities where you have a border going through them, they are not communities where you have a fence splitting them."
Pelosi also touted legislation known as the DREAM Act that would make it easier for some illegal immigrants to receive higher education benefits. She spoke at a conference that drew more than 5,000 students for activities designed to inspire careers in science and technology.
The DREAM Act would eliminate a federal provision that discourages states from providing illegal immigrants with lower in-state tuition rates. It also would allow permanent residency for illegal immigrants who entered the country as children and have been admitted to an institution of higher education.
"It just isn't fair," Pelosi said. "Those young people who came to America one way or another ... their opportunities are curtailed because of the situation. And it's not only harmful to them — it's harmful to the country."
------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
"It just isn't fair," Pelosi said. I agree with you Ms. Pelosi.... It isn't fair to the millions of Americans fitting the bill for illegal immigrants. It isn't fair to true American college students who take on loans to pay for out-of-state tuition. It isn't fair to circumvent the will of the American people who wants these illegals out, and for them to take their moeny sucking spawn with them.
http://www.ocregister.com/news/new-test-citizenship-1853131-exam-immigrants
New citizenship exam emphasizes principles
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services releases 100 questions to study for civics exam.
By AMY TAXIN and VANJA PETROVIC
The Orange County Register
Can you name one of the country’s longest rivers? A Native American tribe? What makes Benjamin Franklin famous?
Immigrants aspiring to become U.S. citizens will be expected to answer these and other questions on a new naturalization exam that officials hope will deepen their understanding of civics and history and discourage rote memorization of facts and figures.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has been working on the test redesign for more than two years and administered a pilot version to more than 6,000 volunteer applicants. On Thursday, the agency released the final set of 100 test questions that immigrants should study to prepare for the exam, which will be given in their interview to become U.S. citizens starting in October 2008.
The goal of the redesign is to encourage a deeper understanding of U.S. government and an attachment the country and its principles. “Citizenship is not only a benefit but it’s also an identity,” said Alfonso Aguilar, chief of the agency's office of citizenship.
The new test has questions on U.S. geography and 20th century history that aren’t on the current exam. It also has open ended questions with an array of possible answers, designed to get applicants to think more about how U.S. government works and the relevance of historic events.
For example, current test questions include the colors of the flag and a definition for the Constitution. The new exam asks why the flag has 13 stripes and what the Constitution does.
THOUGHTFUL ANSWERS
Tom Donahoe, coordinator of the citizenship program at Santiago Canyon College, said he thought some of the questions had little to do with the meaning of citizenship, for example, the ability to name rivers. But he was pleased to see the test required more thoughtful answers on U.S. civics and government than the current exam.
“I don’t think it’s that much harder but it does require more thinking and it does require something more than a memorized answer,” he said. “We do want an informed electorate. We do want an informed populace. As a nation I think that’s what we want, regardless of whether its people who are born in this country or people who choose to become citizens in this country.”
To become U.S. citizens, applicants must have a green card for five years, show good moral character and pass a civics and English exam. The U.S. has seen a surge in applications for citizenship this year prior to a July fee increase that made the process more expensive; more than 784,000 applications have been filed so far this year, according to USCIS.
Immigrants who apply to become U.S. citizens after Oct. 1, 2008, will take the new exam. Those who apply earlier may have a choice of which exam they prefer to take.
On Thursday, students in a citizenship preparation class in Anaheim Hills quizzed each other on the U.S. Constitution and economic system using the new test questions as a guide. Several students said there’s not much difference between what they’re studying and the new material.
Misako Coleman, 75, of Yorba Linda, has her citizenship interview in November – but said the new questions look similar to what she had expected.
“I’m just studying because I received the paper two days ago and I said, I’ve got to do it,” said Coleman, who is originally from Japan. “I’ve never learned this, so I’m just beginning.”
PASSAGE RATE
Aguilar said the pilot exam had a 92 percent passage rate compared with an 84 percent passage rate for first-time takers of the current test. He said USCIS also tried the new test out in adult education classes to ensure it was fair to English-language learners.
Rosalind Gold, senior director of policy, research & advocacy for the National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed Officials, said the key will be ensuring community groups have ample materials to prepare immigrants for the test so it doesn’t discourage people from naturalizing.
“The testing doesn’t seem to indicate this is going to be a major new barrier,” Gold said. “The real proof of this is going to be in how it’s implemented.”
In Washington, several of Orange County’s lawmakers welcomed the changes.
“Being granted U.S. citizenship is a privilege and I don't think it is unreasonable for a citizen to know the name of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or that as citizens they have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," said Rep. Ed Royce, R-Fullerton.
Contact the writer: 714-796-7722 or ataxin@ocregister.com
MY COMMENTS:
To "memorize" what the stars and stripes stand for is to learn it. What's the problem with that? I like the idea of a focus on meaning. But only 10 questions? And only 6 right is good enough? That's not a test, that's a joke. I took the test and passed getting all the questions correct. IT'S WAY TOO EASY! Not to mention if you come here illegally you get amnesty, but if you try to do the right thing and wait in line you have to wait years and take a test. START DEPORTING NOW!
New citizenship exam emphasizes principles
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services releases 100 questions to study for civics exam.
By AMY TAXIN and VANJA PETROVIC
The Orange County Register
Can you name one of the country’s longest rivers? A Native American tribe? What makes Benjamin Franklin famous?
Immigrants aspiring to become U.S. citizens will be expected to answer these and other questions on a new naturalization exam that officials hope will deepen their understanding of civics and history and discourage rote memorization of facts and figures.
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services has been working on the test redesign for more than two years and administered a pilot version to more than 6,000 volunteer applicants. On Thursday, the agency released the final set of 100 test questions that immigrants should study to prepare for the exam, which will be given in their interview to become U.S. citizens starting in October 2008.
The goal of the redesign is to encourage a deeper understanding of U.S. government and an attachment the country and its principles. “Citizenship is not only a benefit but it’s also an identity,” said Alfonso Aguilar, chief of the agency's office of citizenship.
The new test has questions on U.S. geography and 20th century history that aren’t on the current exam. It also has open ended questions with an array of possible answers, designed to get applicants to think more about how U.S. government works and the relevance of historic events.
For example, current test questions include the colors of the flag and a definition for the Constitution. The new exam asks why the flag has 13 stripes and what the Constitution does.
THOUGHTFUL ANSWERS
Tom Donahoe, coordinator of the citizenship program at Santiago Canyon College, said he thought some of the questions had little to do with the meaning of citizenship, for example, the ability to name rivers. But he was pleased to see the test required more thoughtful answers on U.S. civics and government than the current exam.
“I don’t think it’s that much harder but it does require more thinking and it does require something more than a memorized answer,” he said. “We do want an informed electorate. We do want an informed populace. As a nation I think that’s what we want, regardless of whether its people who are born in this country or people who choose to become citizens in this country.”
To become U.S. citizens, applicants must have a green card for five years, show good moral character and pass a civics and English exam. The U.S. has seen a surge in applications for citizenship this year prior to a July fee increase that made the process more expensive; more than 784,000 applications have been filed so far this year, according to USCIS.
Immigrants who apply to become U.S. citizens after Oct. 1, 2008, will take the new exam. Those who apply earlier may have a choice of which exam they prefer to take.
On Thursday, students in a citizenship preparation class in Anaheim Hills quizzed each other on the U.S. Constitution and economic system using the new test questions as a guide. Several students said there’s not much difference between what they’re studying and the new material.
Misako Coleman, 75, of Yorba Linda, has her citizenship interview in November – but said the new questions look similar to what she had expected.
“I’m just studying because I received the paper two days ago and I said, I’ve got to do it,” said Coleman, who is originally from Japan. “I’ve never learned this, so I’m just beginning.”
PASSAGE RATE
Aguilar said the pilot exam had a 92 percent passage rate compared with an 84 percent passage rate for first-time takers of the current test. He said USCIS also tried the new test out in adult education classes to ensure it was fair to English-language learners.
Rosalind Gold, senior director of policy, research & advocacy for the National Association of Latino Elected & Appointed Officials, said the key will be ensuring community groups have ample materials to prepare immigrants for the test so it doesn’t discourage people from naturalizing.
“The testing doesn’t seem to indicate this is going to be a major new barrier,” Gold said. “The real proof of this is going to be in how it’s implemented.”
In Washington, several of Orange County’s lawmakers welcomed the changes.
“Being granted U.S. citizenship is a privilege and I don't think it is unreasonable for a citizen to know the name of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court or that as citizens they have the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness," said Rep. Ed Royce, R-Fullerton.
Contact the writer: 714-796-7722 or ataxin@ocregister.com
MY COMMENTS:
To "memorize" what the stars and stripes stand for is to learn it. What's the problem with that? I like the idea of a focus on meaning. But only 10 questions? And only 6 right is good enough? That's not a test, that's a joke. I took the test and passed getting all the questions correct. IT'S WAY TOO EASY! Not to mention if you come here illegally you get amnesty, but if you try to do the right thing and wait in line you have to wait years and take a test. START DEPORTING NOW!
Dozens in Mexican city ill with suspected avian flu
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57868
Dozens in Mexican city ill with suspected avian flu
Raises concerns over international implications of epidemic
Posted: September 28, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Dozens of people in a Mexican city are gravely ill with what is being treated as a possible outbreak of avian flu, according to a new report from a Spanish-language website.
El Universal is confirming that authorities in a neighborhood in Guanajuato 45 patients have been given medical attention at the area's hospital after they reported symptoms including extreme headaches, stomachaches, vomiting, diarrhea and other weaknesses.
The cases have developed over the last two weeks, and "feel [like] death," according to Silvia Villalobos, one of the victims who spoke to El Universal correspondent Xochitl Alvarez in Spanish.
A spokesman for the regional general hospital, Ernesto Castle, indicated he does not know the cause of the problems, but officials are looking at an avian flu virus, which is transmitted by birds and is similar to botulism, as a source.
He reported at least 45 patients have been given emergency room medical attention, while other individuals went to their private physicians for help.
One man reported his wife was hospitalized after the symptoms hit, waking her with fever and chills, before she fainted.
Guadalupe Gomez, a resident of the area, said her concern was that the epidemic was being carried by flies attracted by leather processed in the tanning industry, which includes leathers from other nations.
City spokesman Jose Eusebio Olague said officials have directed that barricades be set up so that the sick do not spread the infections even further.
Traditional causes for fever and chills essentially have been ruled out by various tests, officials said. Sources in the air, water and other industries have been eliminated as a cause, officials said.
This specific situation already was addressed at the recent Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America summit in Canada, where officials released a plan that establishes U.N. law along with regulations by the World Trade Organization and World Health Organization as supreme over U.S. law during a pandemic. It also sets the stage for militarizing the management of continental health emergencies.
The "North American Plan for Avian & Pandemic Influenza" was finalized at the SPP summit last month in Montebello, Quebec.
At the same time, the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, has created a webpage dedicated to avian flu and has been running exercises in preparation for the possible use of U.S. military forces in a continental domestic emergency involving avian flu or pandemic influenza.
With virtually no media attention, in 2005 President Bush shifted U.S. policy on avian flu and pandemic influenza, placing the country under international guidelines not specifically determined by domestic agencies.
The policy shift was formalized Sept. 14, 2005, when Bush announced a new International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza to a High-Level Plenary Meeting of the U.N. General Assembly, in New York.
The new International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza was designed to supersede an earlier November 2005 Homeland Security report that called for a U.S. national strategy that would be coordinated by the Departments of Homeland Security, Health and Agriculture.
The 2005 plan, operative until Bush announced the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, directed the State Department to work with the WHO and U.N., but it does not mention that international health controls are to be considered controlling over relevant U.S. statutes or authorities.
Under the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, Bush agreed the U.S. would work through the U.N. system influenza coordinator to develop a continental emergency response plan operating through authorities under the WTO, North American Free Trade Agreement and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.
The SPP plan for avian and pandemic influenza announced at the Canadian summit last month embraces the international control principles Bush first announced to the U.N. in his 2005 International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza declaration.
David Nabarro is new U.N. system influenza coordinator
In Sept. 2005, Dr. David Nabarro was appointed the first U.N. system influenza coordinator, a position which also places him as a senior policy adviser to the U.N. director-general.
Nabarro soon after fueled the global fear that an epidemic was virtually inevitable.
In response to a question about the 1918-1919 flu pandemic that killed approximately 40 million people worldwide, Nabarro commented, "I am certain there will be another pandemic sometime."
Nabarro stressed at the press conference that he saw as inevitable a worldwide pandemic influenza coming soon that would kill millions.
Dozens in Mexican city ill with suspected avian flu
Raises concerns over international implications of epidemic
Posted: September 28, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Dozens of people in a Mexican city are gravely ill with what is being treated as a possible outbreak of avian flu, according to a new report from a Spanish-language website.
El Universal is confirming that authorities in a neighborhood in Guanajuato 45 patients have been given medical attention at the area's hospital after they reported symptoms including extreme headaches, stomachaches, vomiting, diarrhea and other weaknesses.
The cases have developed over the last two weeks, and "feel [like] death," according to Silvia Villalobos, one of the victims who spoke to El Universal correspondent Xochitl Alvarez in Spanish.
A spokesman for the regional general hospital, Ernesto Castle, indicated he does not know the cause of the problems, but officials are looking at an avian flu virus, which is transmitted by birds and is similar to botulism, as a source.
He reported at least 45 patients have been given emergency room medical attention, while other individuals went to their private physicians for help.
One man reported his wife was hospitalized after the symptoms hit, waking her with fever and chills, before she fainted.
Guadalupe Gomez, a resident of the area, said her concern was that the epidemic was being carried by flies attracted by leather processed in the tanning industry, which includes leathers from other nations.
City spokesman Jose Eusebio Olague said officials have directed that barricades be set up so that the sick do not spread the infections even further.
Traditional causes for fever and chills essentially have been ruled out by various tests, officials said. Sources in the air, water and other industries have been eliminated as a cause, officials said.
This specific situation already was addressed at the recent Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America summit in Canada, where officials released a plan that establishes U.N. law along with regulations by the World Trade Organization and World Health Organization as supreme over U.S. law during a pandemic. It also sets the stage for militarizing the management of continental health emergencies.
The "North American Plan for Avian & Pandemic Influenza" was finalized at the SPP summit last month in Montebello, Quebec.
At the same time, the U.S. Northern Command, or NORTHCOM, has created a webpage dedicated to avian flu and has been running exercises in preparation for the possible use of U.S. military forces in a continental domestic emergency involving avian flu or pandemic influenza.
With virtually no media attention, in 2005 President Bush shifted U.S. policy on avian flu and pandemic influenza, placing the country under international guidelines not specifically determined by domestic agencies.
The policy shift was formalized Sept. 14, 2005, when Bush announced a new International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza to a High-Level Plenary Meeting of the U.N. General Assembly, in New York.
The new International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza was designed to supersede an earlier November 2005 Homeland Security report that called for a U.S. national strategy that would be coordinated by the Departments of Homeland Security, Health and Agriculture.
The 2005 plan, operative until Bush announced the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, directed the State Department to work with the WHO and U.N., but it does not mention that international health controls are to be considered controlling over relevant U.S. statutes or authorities.
Under the International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza, Bush agreed the U.S. would work through the U.N. system influenza coordinator to develop a continental emergency response plan operating through authorities under the WTO, North American Free Trade Agreement and the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization.
The SPP plan for avian and pandemic influenza announced at the Canadian summit last month embraces the international control principles Bush first announced to the U.N. in his 2005 International Partnership on Avian and Pandemic Influenza declaration.
David Nabarro is new U.N. system influenza coordinator
In Sept. 2005, Dr. David Nabarro was appointed the first U.N. system influenza coordinator, a position which also places him as a senior policy adviser to the U.N. director-general.
Nabarro soon after fueled the global fear that an epidemic was virtually inevitable.
In response to a question about the 1918-1919 flu pandemic that killed approximately 40 million people worldwide, Nabarro commented, "I am certain there will be another pandemic sometime."
Nabarro stressed at the press conference that he saw as inevitable a worldwide pandemic influenza coming soon that would kill millions.
Democratic Candidates Say They're OK With Second-Grade Teacher Reading Gay Prince Fairy Tale
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C298307%2C00.html
Democratic Candidates Say They're OK With Second-Grade Teacher Reading Gay Prince Fairy Tale
Thursday, September 27, 2007
By Catherine Donaldson-Evans
An illustration in the fairy tale 'King & King'
A fairy tale about two princes falling in love sparked a backlash — and a lawsuit — against a teacher and a school last year when it was read to a second-grade class in Massachusetts.
But the three frontrunners in the Democratic presidential race suggested Wednesday night at their debate in New Hampshire that they’d support reading the controversial book to children as part of a school curriculum.
Moderator Tim Russert asked John Edwards, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton whether they’d be comfortable having the story — called “King & King” — read to their children in school.
Edwards gave the first and most definitive answer — a resounding and instant “yes, absolutely” — although he added that it “might be a little tough” for second-graders.
Obama agreed with Edwards and revealed that his wife has already spoken to his 6- and 9-year-old daughters about same-sex marriage.
Clinton said she believes it’s up to parents to decide how to handle such topics, but added that it’s important to teach kids about the “many differences that are in the world.”
Same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, and, as Russert pointed out Wednesday, most of the Democratic candidates have said they oppose it. But though they don't back the legislation, they apparently think it's OK to teach elementary-school students about gay marriage.
“I want my children to understand everything about the difficulties that gay and lesbian couples are faced with every day, the discrimination that they’re faced with every single day of their lives,” Edwards said. “I suspect my two younger children, Emma Claire, who’s 9, and Jack, who’s 7, will reach the same conclusion that my daughter Cate, who’s 25, has reached — which is, she doesn’t understand why her dad is not in favor of same-sex marriage.”
The 2004 vice presidential candidate and former North Carolina senator said he doesn’t want to influence his kids’ opinions about the issue.
“I don’t want to make that decision on behalf of my children,” he said. “I want my children to be able to make that decision on behalf of themselves, and I want them to be exposed to all the information, even in — did you say second grade? Second grade might be a little tough, but even in second grade to be exposed to all those possibilities, because I don’t want to impose my view. Nobody made me God.”
Obama told Russert that his sentiments are similar to those of Edwards, and, when asked whether he’d sat down to talk about same-sex marriage with his young daughters, he replied that his wife had.
“The fact is, my 9-year-old and my 6-year-old I think are already aware that there are same-sex couples,” the Illinois senator told the debate. “One of the things I want to communicate to my children is not to be afraid of people who are different. …. One of the things I think the next president has to do is stop fanning people’s fears. If we spend all our time feeding the American people fear and conflict and division, then they become fearful and conflicted and divided.”
Clinton said she respects the viewpoints of Obama and Edwards, but she sidestepped the question of whether she’d be comfortable having a storybook like “King & King” read to her own child at that age.
“With respect to your individual children, that is such a matter of parental discretion,” Clinton said. “Obviously, it is better to try to … help your children understand the many differences that are in the world. … And that goes far beyond sexual orientation. So I think that this issue of gays and lesbians and their rights will remain an important one in our country.”
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is vying for the Republican nomination for president, weighed in afterward with a statement accusing the Democratic candidates of being “out of touch” with America.
“Not one candidate was uncomfortable with young children learning about same-sex marriage in the second grade,” Romney said in the statement. “This is a subject that should be left to parents, not public school teachers. We need to strengthen our families by passing a federal marriage amendment and also insisting on marriage before having children. Change in Washington requires Democrats with the courage to stand up to their ultra liberal base and do what's right for our children."
Some Lexington, Mass., parents were livid that a Joseph Estabrook Elementary School teacher read “King & King” to their second-grade children in class.
The Dutch tale, which has been translated into English, is about a prince whose mother pressures him to find a princess but who ends up falling in love with and marrying the brother of one of the prospective brides instead.
Last year, a judge dismissed a federal lawsuit brought by two sets of parents of students in the class who objected to the introduction of homosexual themes to their 7-year-olds without alerting them first, on the grounds that it was a violation of the state’s sex-education parental notification clause.
School officials stood by their decision to teach about different kinds of marriage and said that Massachusetts law requires them to do so.
------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Personally I feel all talks about sexuality should be left to parents until the child is in high school. Sex ed in high school or maybe even Jr. High is good enough. We don't need to educate 4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 year olds on any matter dealing with sex education. Biology of how the body work, sure... but sex ed. and homosexuality, NO!
Democratic Candidates Say They're OK With Second-Grade Teacher Reading Gay Prince Fairy Tale
Thursday, September 27, 2007
By Catherine Donaldson-Evans
An illustration in the fairy tale 'King & King'
A fairy tale about two princes falling in love sparked a backlash — and a lawsuit — against a teacher and a school last year when it was read to a second-grade class in Massachusetts.
But the three frontrunners in the Democratic presidential race suggested Wednesday night at their debate in New Hampshire that they’d support reading the controversial book to children as part of a school curriculum.
Moderator Tim Russert asked John Edwards, Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. Hillary Clinton whether they’d be comfortable having the story — called “King & King” — read to their children in school.
Edwards gave the first and most definitive answer — a resounding and instant “yes, absolutely” — although he added that it “might be a little tough” for second-graders.
Obama agreed with Edwards and revealed that his wife has already spoken to his 6- and 9-year-old daughters about same-sex marriage.
Clinton said she believes it’s up to parents to decide how to handle such topics, but added that it’s important to teach kids about the “many differences that are in the world.”
Same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, and, as Russert pointed out Wednesday, most of the Democratic candidates have said they oppose it. But though they don't back the legislation, they apparently think it's OK to teach elementary-school students about gay marriage.
“I want my children to understand everything about the difficulties that gay and lesbian couples are faced with every day, the discrimination that they’re faced with every single day of their lives,” Edwards said. “I suspect my two younger children, Emma Claire, who’s 9, and Jack, who’s 7, will reach the same conclusion that my daughter Cate, who’s 25, has reached — which is, she doesn’t understand why her dad is not in favor of same-sex marriage.”
The 2004 vice presidential candidate and former North Carolina senator said he doesn’t want to influence his kids’ opinions about the issue.
“I don’t want to make that decision on behalf of my children,” he said. “I want my children to be able to make that decision on behalf of themselves, and I want them to be exposed to all the information, even in — did you say second grade? Second grade might be a little tough, but even in second grade to be exposed to all those possibilities, because I don’t want to impose my view. Nobody made me God.”
Obama told Russert that his sentiments are similar to those of Edwards, and, when asked whether he’d sat down to talk about same-sex marriage with his young daughters, he replied that his wife had.
“The fact is, my 9-year-old and my 6-year-old I think are already aware that there are same-sex couples,” the Illinois senator told the debate. “One of the things I want to communicate to my children is not to be afraid of people who are different. …. One of the things I think the next president has to do is stop fanning people’s fears. If we spend all our time feeding the American people fear and conflict and division, then they become fearful and conflicted and divided.”
Clinton said she respects the viewpoints of Obama and Edwards, but she sidestepped the question of whether she’d be comfortable having a storybook like “King & King” read to her own child at that age.
“With respect to your individual children, that is such a matter of parental discretion,” Clinton said. “Obviously, it is better to try to … help your children understand the many differences that are in the world. … And that goes far beyond sexual orientation. So I think that this issue of gays and lesbians and their rights will remain an important one in our country.”
Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who is vying for the Republican nomination for president, weighed in afterward with a statement accusing the Democratic candidates of being “out of touch” with America.
“Not one candidate was uncomfortable with young children learning about same-sex marriage in the second grade,” Romney said in the statement. “This is a subject that should be left to parents, not public school teachers. We need to strengthen our families by passing a federal marriage amendment and also insisting on marriage before having children. Change in Washington requires Democrats with the courage to stand up to their ultra liberal base and do what's right for our children."
Some Lexington, Mass., parents were livid that a Joseph Estabrook Elementary School teacher read “King & King” to their second-grade children in class.
The Dutch tale, which has been translated into English, is about a prince whose mother pressures him to find a princess but who ends up falling in love with and marrying the brother of one of the prospective brides instead.
Last year, a judge dismissed a federal lawsuit brought by two sets of parents of students in the class who objected to the introduction of homosexual themes to their 7-year-olds without alerting them first, on the grounds that it was a violation of the state’s sex-education parental notification clause.
School officials stood by their decision to teach about different kinds of marriage and said that Massachusetts law requires them to do so.
------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Personally I feel all talks about sexuality should be left to parents until the child is in high school. Sex ed in high school or maybe even Jr. High is good enough. We don't need to educate 4-5-6-7-8-9-10-11-12 year olds on any matter dealing with sex education. Biology of how the body work, sure... but sex ed. and homosexuality, NO!
Thursday, September 27, 2007
US Video Shows Hacker Hit on Power Grid
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070927/D8RTM7M81.html
US Video Shows Hacker Hit on Power Grid
Sep 27, 4:01 AM (ET)
By TED BRIDIS and EILEEN SULLIVAN
(AP) In this image from video released by the Department of Homeland Security, smoke pours from an...
Full Image
WASHINGTON (AP) - A government video shows the potential destruction caused by hackers seizing control of a crucial part of the U.S. electrical grid: an industrial turbine spinning wildly out of control until it becomes a smoking hulk and power shuts down.
The video, produced for the Homeland Security Department and obtained by The Associated Press on Wednesday, was marked "Official Use Only." It shows commands quietly triggered by simulated hackers having such a violent reaction that the enormous turbine shudders as pieces fly apart and it belches black-and-white smoke.
The video was produced for top U.S. policy makers by the Idaho National Laboratory, which has studied the little-understood risks to the specialized electronic equipment that operates power, water and chemical plants. Vice President Dick Cheney is among those who have watched the video, said one U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because this official was not authorized to publicly discuss such high-level briefings.
"They've taken a theoretical attack and they've shown in a very demonstrable way the impact you can have using cyber means and cyber techniques against this type of infrastructure," said Amit Yoran, former U.S. cybersecurity chief for the Bush administration. Yoran is chief executive for NetWitness Corp., which sells sophisticated network monitoring software.
"It's so graphic," Yoran said. "Talking about bits and bytes doesn't have the same impact as seeing something catch fire."
The electrical attack never actually happened. The recorded demonstration, called the "Aurora Generator Test," was conducted in March by government researchers investigating a dangerous vulnerability in computers at U.S. utility companies known as supervisory control and data acquisition systems. The programming flaw was quietly fixed, and equipment-makers urged utilities to take protective measures.
There was no evidence any U.S. utility company suffered damage from hackers or terrorists using this technique, U.S. officials said. But these officials cautioned that affected systems are not routinely monitored as closely as many modern corporate computer networks, so there would be little forensic evidence to study after such a break-in.
Industry experts cautioned that intruders would need specialized knowledge to carry out such attacks, including the ability to turn off warning systems.
"The video is not a realistic representation of how the power system would operate," said Stan Johnson, a manager at the North American Electric Reliability Corp., the Princeton, N.J.-based organization charged with overseeing the power grid.
A top Homeland Security Department official, Robert Jamison, said companies are working to limit such attacks.
"Is this something we should be concerned about? Yes," said Jamison, who oversees the department's cybersecurity division. "But we've taken a lot of risk off the table."
President Bush's top telecommunications advisers concluded years ago that an organization such as a foreign intelligence service or a well-funded terror group "could conduct a structured attack on the electric power grid electronically, with a high degree of anonymity, and without having to set foot in the target nation." Ominously, the Idaho National Laboratory - which produced the new video - has described the risk as "the invisible threat."
Experts said the affected systems were not developed with security in mind.
"What keeps your lights on are some very, very old technology," said Joe Weiss, a security expert who has testified before Congress about such threats. "If you can get access to these systems, you can conceptually cause them to do whatever it is you want them to do."
The Homeland Security Department has been working with industries, especially electrical and nuclear companies, to enhance security measures. The electric industry is still working on their internal assessments and plans, but the nuclear sector has implemented its security measures at all its plants, the government said.
In July the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission proposed a set of standards to help protect the country's bulk electric power supply system from cyber attacks. These standards would require certain users, owners and operators of power grids to establish plans and controls.
US Video Shows Hacker Hit on Power Grid
Sep 27, 4:01 AM (ET)
By TED BRIDIS and EILEEN SULLIVAN
(AP) In this image from video released by the Department of Homeland Security, smoke pours from an...
Full Image
WASHINGTON (AP) - A government video shows the potential destruction caused by hackers seizing control of a crucial part of the U.S. electrical grid: an industrial turbine spinning wildly out of control until it becomes a smoking hulk and power shuts down.
The video, produced for the Homeland Security Department and obtained by The Associated Press on Wednesday, was marked "Official Use Only." It shows commands quietly triggered by simulated hackers having such a violent reaction that the enormous turbine shudders as pieces fly apart and it belches black-and-white smoke.
The video was produced for top U.S. policy makers by the Idaho National Laboratory, which has studied the little-understood risks to the specialized electronic equipment that operates power, water and chemical plants. Vice President Dick Cheney is among those who have watched the video, said one U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because this official was not authorized to publicly discuss such high-level briefings.
"They've taken a theoretical attack and they've shown in a very demonstrable way the impact you can have using cyber means and cyber techniques against this type of infrastructure," said Amit Yoran, former U.S. cybersecurity chief for the Bush administration. Yoran is chief executive for NetWitness Corp., which sells sophisticated network monitoring software.
"It's so graphic," Yoran said. "Talking about bits and bytes doesn't have the same impact as seeing something catch fire."
The electrical attack never actually happened. The recorded demonstration, called the "Aurora Generator Test," was conducted in March by government researchers investigating a dangerous vulnerability in computers at U.S. utility companies known as supervisory control and data acquisition systems. The programming flaw was quietly fixed, and equipment-makers urged utilities to take protective measures.
There was no evidence any U.S. utility company suffered damage from hackers or terrorists using this technique, U.S. officials said. But these officials cautioned that affected systems are not routinely monitored as closely as many modern corporate computer networks, so there would be little forensic evidence to study after such a break-in.
Industry experts cautioned that intruders would need specialized knowledge to carry out such attacks, including the ability to turn off warning systems.
"The video is not a realistic representation of how the power system would operate," said Stan Johnson, a manager at the North American Electric Reliability Corp., the Princeton, N.J.-based organization charged with overseeing the power grid.
A top Homeland Security Department official, Robert Jamison, said companies are working to limit such attacks.
"Is this something we should be concerned about? Yes," said Jamison, who oversees the department's cybersecurity division. "But we've taken a lot of risk off the table."
President Bush's top telecommunications advisers concluded years ago that an organization such as a foreign intelligence service or a well-funded terror group "could conduct a structured attack on the electric power grid electronically, with a high degree of anonymity, and without having to set foot in the target nation." Ominously, the Idaho National Laboratory - which produced the new video - has described the risk as "the invisible threat."
Experts said the affected systems were not developed with security in mind.
"What keeps your lights on are some very, very old technology," said Joe Weiss, a security expert who has testified before Congress about such threats. "If you can get access to these systems, you can conceptually cause them to do whatever it is you want them to do."
The Homeland Security Department has been working with industries, especially electrical and nuclear companies, to enhance security measures. The electric industry is still working on their internal assessments and plans, but the nuclear sector has implemented its security measures at all its plants, the government said.
In July the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission proposed a set of standards to help protect the country's bulk electric power supply system from cyber attacks. These standards would require certain users, owners and operators of power grids to establish plans and controls.
Bin Laden may have just escaped U.S. forces
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21000298/
Bin Laden may have just escaped U.S. forces
August mission in Tora Bora almost snared 'high value target'
Did U.S. just miss bin Laden?
Sept. 26: U.S. forces attacked Tora Bora in August amid signs Osama bin Laden was near. NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski reports.
Updated: 7:07 p.m. CT Sept 26, 2007
A little more than a month ago, with the anniversary of Sept. 11 approaching and fears of a new al Qaeda attack rising, some U.S. intelligence and military analysts thought they had found one of the world’s two most wanted men just where they last saw them six years ago.
For three days and nights — between Aug. 14 and 16 — U.S. and Afghanistan forces pounded the mountain caves in Tora Bora, the same caves where Osama Bin Laden had hidden out and then fled in late 2001 after U.S. forces drove al Qaeda out of Afghanistan cities. Ultimately, however, U.S. forces failed to find Bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al Zawahiri, even though their attacks left dozens of al Qaeda and Taliban dead.
One of the officials interviewed by NBC News, a general officer, admitted Tuesday that it was “possible” Bin Laden was at Tora Bora, saying, in fact, "I still don’t know if he was there."
Still, some in the special operations and intelligence community are telling NBC News that there was a lack of coordination particularly in the choice of support troops. But with intelligence limited on who was there, no one is willing to say that the lack of key units permitted Bin Laden or Zawahiri to escape.
When the operation began in early August there was no expectation that Bin Laden or Zawahiri would be there, say U.S. military and intelligence officials. Instead, there was intelligence of a pre-Ramadan gathering of al Qaeda including "leadership" in Tora Bora. Senior officials in the U.S. and Pakistan tell NBC News that planning for the attacks intensified around Aug. 10 once analysts suggested that either Bin Laden or Zawahiri may have be drawn to the conference at Tora Bora. (When U.S. forces attacked al Qaeda camps in August 1998, following the East Africa embassy bombings, Bin Laden was attending a pre-Ramadan conference of al Qaeda in the same general area of eastern Afghanistan).
While the intelligence did not provide “positively identification” that Bin Laden or Zawahiri were at the scene, there was enough other intelligence to suggest that one of the two men was there. Bin Laden and Zawahiri are not believed to have traveled together since mid-2003 for security reasons.
Another official said that intelligence analysts believed strongly that there was a high probability that “either HVT-1 or HVT-2 was there,” using U.S. intelligence descriptions — high value targets — for Bin Laden and Zawahiri. He added that while opinion inside the agency was divided, many believed it was Bin Laden rather than Zawahiri who was present. The reason: “They thought they spotted his security detail,” said the official, a large al Qaeda security detail — the kind of protection that would normally surround only Bin Laden, or Zawahiri.
Also, locals reported the presence of groups known to be part of Bin Laden’s security detail —Chechens, Uzbeks and other Arabs, men willing to die rather than surrender top al Qaeda officials.
The military operation included "several hundred" U.S. and Afghan ground forces, say officials. Elements from the 82nd Airborne blocked off escape routes through the mountains on the Afghanistan side of the border, while helicopters inserted U.S. Navy Seals at night. The Seals pinpointed enemy positions and called in air strikes; the 82nd came in and "mopped up."
On the other side of the border, a senior Pakistani official says the U.S. military helped thousands of Pakistani forces — including their elite commando units — set up a blockade to sweep up any al Qaeda fleeing Afghanistan.
Any operation to take down Bin Laden or Zawahiri would have been formidable.
“He's surrounded by the true believers,” reported Rick Francona, who worked with CIA and special ops teams in Iraq in the 1990s. “And they will fight to the death to protect him, they will probably even kill him before they allow him to be captured. So if you're going to go in that area, you have to go in there with enough force that you think you can accomplish this mission successfully and not lose all of your guys in the process.”
One senior military official said Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Peter Pace personally briefed the president on the specifics of the ongoing operation.
The operation closely parallels the killing of Abu Musab al Zarqawi last year. NBC News reported at the time that the U.S. military did not positively determine that Zarqawi was in the house that was bombed. Instead, they had surveillance on Zarqawi's spiritual adviser who led them to the house, and the decision was made to take the shot because they didn’t want to miss the chance to get Zarqawi. One general predicts, "That's the way we'll get Bin Laden." They may not have that positive ID, but there'll be enough intelligence to prompt an air strike and they'll find Bin Laden in the rubble.
What happened this time? Military officials admit there were unidentified "planning and coordination problems" even before it got to execution, “primarily between the operators and the generals who give the go-orders” added an intelligence official. A company of the 82nd Airborne was brought in since a Ranger team trained in special operations was not available. But the combination of the “dark side” — the SEALs — and the conventional — the 82nd Airborne — didn't work. "They didn't gel," said the military official. There was "a lack of responsiveness to the intelligence and a lack of aggressiveness."
Michael Sheehan, a former Army Special Operations colonel and counter terrorism ambassador, says he is not surprised.
“Our response is normally too big, too slow, too cumbersome and too risk adverse and those factors normally come from Washington,” said Sheehan.
“The operators normally want to go in much smaller, much more low profile in order to be able to get to the target without being identified and as those plans go up the chain of command they normally get much bigger and much more cumbersome.”
But the bigger part of the picture is the question of allocation of resources from Afghanistan to Iraq. All Delta Force and “dark side” Rangers were moved to Iraq, said a special operations officer involved in the Afghanistan operation. Left behind in Afghanistan were SEAL Team Six and some Rangers. But apparently in this case, not enough “dark side” were available. The 82nd, said a second special operations officer, “is a poor substitute … [it is] a blunder to use them on an op with dark side operators.”
Justin Balding is a Producer for Dateline NBC. Adam Ciralsky is a producer with the NBC News investigative unit. Robert Windrem is an investigative producer for NBC News special projects.
© 2007 MSNBC Interactive
Bin Laden may have just escaped U.S. forces
August mission in Tora Bora almost snared 'high value target'
Did U.S. just miss bin Laden?
Sept. 26: U.S. forces attacked Tora Bora in August amid signs Osama bin Laden was near. NBC’s Jim Miklaszewski reports.
Updated: 7:07 p.m. CT Sept 26, 2007
A little more than a month ago, with the anniversary of Sept. 11 approaching and fears of a new al Qaeda attack rising, some U.S. intelligence and military analysts thought they had found one of the world’s two most wanted men just where they last saw them six years ago.
For three days and nights — between Aug. 14 and 16 — U.S. and Afghanistan forces pounded the mountain caves in Tora Bora, the same caves where Osama Bin Laden had hidden out and then fled in late 2001 after U.S. forces drove al Qaeda out of Afghanistan cities. Ultimately, however, U.S. forces failed to find Bin Laden or his deputy, Ayman al Zawahiri, even though their attacks left dozens of al Qaeda and Taliban dead.
One of the officials interviewed by NBC News, a general officer, admitted Tuesday that it was “possible” Bin Laden was at Tora Bora, saying, in fact, "I still don’t know if he was there."
Still, some in the special operations and intelligence community are telling NBC News that there was a lack of coordination particularly in the choice of support troops. But with intelligence limited on who was there, no one is willing to say that the lack of key units permitted Bin Laden or Zawahiri to escape.
When the operation began in early August there was no expectation that Bin Laden or Zawahiri would be there, say U.S. military and intelligence officials. Instead, there was intelligence of a pre-Ramadan gathering of al Qaeda including "leadership" in Tora Bora. Senior officials in the U.S. and Pakistan tell NBC News that planning for the attacks intensified around Aug. 10 once analysts suggested that either Bin Laden or Zawahiri may have be drawn to the conference at Tora Bora. (When U.S. forces attacked al Qaeda camps in August 1998, following the East Africa embassy bombings, Bin Laden was attending a pre-Ramadan conference of al Qaeda in the same general area of eastern Afghanistan).
While the intelligence did not provide “positively identification” that Bin Laden or Zawahiri were at the scene, there was enough other intelligence to suggest that one of the two men was there. Bin Laden and Zawahiri are not believed to have traveled together since mid-2003 for security reasons.
Another official said that intelligence analysts believed strongly that there was a high probability that “either HVT-1 or HVT-2 was there,” using U.S. intelligence descriptions — high value targets — for Bin Laden and Zawahiri. He added that while opinion inside the agency was divided, many believed it was Bin Laden rather than Zawahiri who was present. The reason: “They thought they spotted his security detail,” said the official, a large al Qaeda security detail — the kind of protection that would normally surround only Bin Laden, or Zawahiri.
Also, locals reported the presence of groups known to be part of Bin Laden’s security detail —Chechens, Uzbeks and other Arabs, men willing to die rather than surrender top al Qaeda officials.
The military operation included "several hundred" U.S. and Afghan ground forces, say officials. Elements from the 82nd Airborne blocked off escape routes through the mountains on the Afghanistan side of the border, while helicopters inserted U.S. Navy Seals at night. The Seals pinpointed enemy positions and called in air strikes; the 82nd came in and "mopped up."
On the other side of the border, a senior Pakistani official says the U.S. military helped thousands of Pakistani forces — including their elite commando units — set up a blockade to sweep up any al Qaeda fleeing Afghanistan.
Any operation to take down Bin Laden or Zawahiri would have been formidable.
“He's surrounded by the true believers,” reported Rick Francona, who worked with CIA and special ops teams in Iraq in the 1990s. “And they will fight to the death to protect him, they will probably even kill him before they allow him to be captured. So if you're going to go in that area, you have to go in there with enough force that you think you can accomplish this mission successfully and not lose all of your guys in the process.”
One senior military official said Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Peter Pace personally briefed the president on the specifics of the ongoing operation.
The operation closely parallels the killing of Abu Musab al Zarqawi last year. NBC News reported at the time that the U.S. military did not positively determine that Zarqawi was in the house that was bombed. Instead, they had surveillance on Zarqawi's spiritual adviser who led them to the house, and the decision was made to take the shot because they didn’t want to miss the chance to get Zarqawi. One general predicts, "That's the way we'll get Bin Laden." They may not have that positive ID, but there'll be enough intelligence to prompt an air strike and they'll find Bin Laden in the rubble.
What happened this time? Military officials admit there were unidentified "planning and coordination problems" even before it got to execution, “primarily between the operators and the generals who give the go-orders” added an intelligence official. A company of the 82nd Airborne was brought in since a Ranger team trained in special operations was not available. But the combination of the “dark side” — the SEALs — and the conventional — the 82nd Airborne — didn't work. "They didn't gel," said the military official. There was "a lack of responsiveness to the intelligence and a lack of aggressiveness."
Michael Sheehan, a former Army Special Operations colonel and counter terrorism ambassador, says he is not surprised.
“Our response is normally too big, too slow, too cumbersome and too risk adverse and those factors normally come from Washington,” said Sheehan.
“The operators normally want to go in much smaller, much more low profile in order to be able to get to the target without being identified and as those plans go up the chain of command they normally get much bigger and much more cumbersome.”
But the bigger part of the picture is the question of allocation of resources from Afghanistan to Iraq. All Delta Force and “dark side” Rangers were moved to Iraq, said a special operations officer involved in the Afghanistan operation. Left behind in Afghanistan were SEAL Team Six and some Rangers. But apparently in this case, not enough “dark side” were available. The 82nd, said a second special operations officer, “is a poor substitute … [it is] a blunder to use them on an op with dark side operators.”
Justin Balding is a Producer for Dateline NBC. Adam Ciralsky is a producer with the NBC News investigative unit. Robert Windrem is an investigative producer for NBC News special projects.
© 2007 MSNBC Interactive
Gore calls for ‘global Marshall plan’
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/633d030a-6c5d-11dc-a0cf-0000779fd2ac.html
Gore calls for ‘global Marshall plan’
By Daniel Pimlott in New York
Published: September 26 2007 19:37 | Last updated: September 26 2007 19:37
Al Gore, the former US vice-president, on Wednesday called for a “Marshall plan” to make job creation and measures to address climate change compatible and urged President George W. Bush to commit to mandatory cuts in carbon dioxide emissions.
“This is an emergency,” Mr Gore told the opening session of the Clinton Global Initiative. “I think that the key to fighting global poverty is to have the wealthy nations and the developing nations join together to reduce global warming … I think what we need is a global Marshall plan to make the creation of jobs around the reduction of carbon the central principle for how we develop this.”
Mr Gore said Mr Bush should follow the example of former US president Ronald Reagan, who after an initial delay responded to the 1985 discovery of a hole in the ozone layer by supporting a marked reduction in chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs.
“We have to have a binding reduction on carbon,’’ he said.
Robert Zoellick, the head of the World Bank, sounded a sceptical note on the developing world’s ability and desire to reduce carbon emissions, however. Poorer countries are worried aid is going to be “hijacked” by the climate change agenda, Mr Zoellick said.
Countries such as China and India threaten to become the world’s top producers of carbon dioxide, as they ramp up energy use to feed rampant economic growth. The rapid development of poorer countries is considered by many scientists and economists to be one of the chief challenges in tackling climate change.
“There is some sensitivity in the developing world that resources that can be channelled to climate change will come at the expense of other development needs,” Mr Zoellick said. “It needn’t be that way, it shouldn’t be that way… but it is the responsibility of the developed world to reassure the developing world that it doesn’t come at their expense and instead can come in support of their aims of overcoming poverty.”
“Every place I went, people are very worried that developed countries are going to hijack spending,” he added. “We have to explain how it fits their energy and growth needs.”
Mr Zoellick said the bank could assist developing countries combat climate change through advice in taking part in carbon-trading markets, assisting in accessing technological advances and innovations, but “always putting the focus on development”.
The World Bank estimates that 1.6bn people around the world do not have access to electricity. The developing world currently has a funding gap of around half of the $160bn investment needed annually to fulfil growing demand for electricity, the bank says.
Bill Clinton, the former US president whose organisation is hosting the philanthropic forum for world leaders and top businesses, also called on the World Bank to promote ways of dealing with climate change to the governments it deals with. He argued that the organisation needed to persuade developing countries that they could grow in ways that would alleviate damage to the environment and benefit economic growth.
“We don’t have a right to ask anybody in the world to stay poor, but if you can show them that they can get rich quicker … by pursuing a cleaner energy path… that would be a valuable role for the World Bank,” he said. “People can’t seize options they are not aware of.”
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
--------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
EXCUSE ME WHILE I PUKE.... This would be laughable if it wasn't so damn scary. God help us.
Gore calls for ‘global Marshall plan’
By Daniel Pimlott in New York
Published: September 26 2007 19:37 | Last updated: September 26 2007 19:37
Al Gore, the former US vice-president, on Wednesday called for a “Marshall plan” to make job creation and measures to address climate change compatible and urged President George W. Bush to commit to mandatory cuts in carbon dioxide emissions.
“This is an emergency,” Mr Gore told the opening session of the Clinton Global Initiative. “I think that the key to fighting global poverty is to have the wealthy nations and the developing nations join together to reduce global warming … I think what we need is a global Marshall plan to make the creation of jobs around the reduction of carbon the central principle for how we develop this.”
Mr Gore said Mr Bush should follow the example of former US president Ronald Reagan, who after an initial delay responded to the 1985 discovery of a hole in the ozone layer by supporting a marked reduction in chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs.
“We have to have a binding reduction on carbon,’’ he said.
Robert Zoellick, the head of the World Bank, sounded a sceptical note on the developing world’s ability and desire to reduce carbon emissions, however. Poorer countries are worried aid is going to be “hijacked” by the climate change agenda, Mr Zoellick said.
Countries such as China and India threaten to become the world’s top producers of carbon dioxide, as they ramp up energy use to feed rampant economic growth. The rapid development of poorer countries is considered by many scientists and economists to be one of the chief challenges in tackling climate change.
“There is some sensitivity in the developing world that resources that can be channelled to climate change will come at the expense of other development needs,” Mr Zoellick said. “It needn’t be that way, it shouldn’t be that way… but it is the responsibility of the developed world to reassure the developing world that it doesn’t come at their expense and instead can come in support of their aims of overcoming poverty.”
“Every place I went, people are very worried that developed countries are going to hijack spending,” he added. “We have to explain how it fits their energy and growth needs.”
Mr Zoellick said the bank could assist developing countries combat climate change through advice in taking part in carbon-trading markets, assisting in accessing technological advances and innovations, but “always putting the focus on development”.
The World Bank estimates that 1.6bn people around the world do not have access to electricity. The developing world currently has a funding gap of around half of the $160bn investment needed annually to fulfil growing demand for electricity, the bank says.
Bill Clinton, the former US president whose organisation is hosting the philanthropic forum for world leaders and top businesses, also called on the World Bank to promote ways of dealing with climate change to the governments it deals with. He argued that the organisation needed to persuade developing countries that they could grow in ways that would alleviate damage to the environment and benefit economic growth.
“We don’t have a right to ask anybody in the world to stay poor, but if you can show them that they can get rich quicker … by pursuing a cleaner energy path… that would be a valuable role for the World Bank,” he said. “People can’t seize options they are not aware of.”
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
--------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
EXCUSE ME WHILE I PUKE.... This would be laughable if it wasn't so damn scary. God help us.
Dollar collapse could result in the "amero"
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53350
Analysts: Dollar collapse would result in 'amero'
Think deep recession likely
regardless of Fed's actions
Posted: December 13, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Two analysts who have reconstructed money supply data after the Fed stopped publishing it argue a coming dollar collapse will set the stage for creating the amero as a North American currency to replace the dollar.
The reconstructed M3 data – the broadest measure of money – published on econometrician Gary Kuever's website, NowAndFutures.com, shows M3 increased at a rate of 11 percent in May, compared to 9 percent when the Federal Reserve quit publishing M3 data earlier this year.
Asked why the Fed decided to stop publishing M3 data, Kuever told WND, "The Fed probably wants to hide how much liquidity is being pumped into the market, and I expect the trend to keep pumping liquidity into the market will continue, especially since the economy is slowing down."
Why is this important?
"The trend line in my M3-plus-debt chart is staggering," Kuever said. "There has been a straight, long-term trend line of M3-plus-credit increasing since 2000. Long-term, we are creating inflation and the dollar has lost almost 98 percent of its value in the past 100 years."
Kuever, a retired investor, is concerned that with growing budget and trade deficits "the dollar could collapse."
"Especially if the Fed cannot increase rates, because we have already entered a recession," he said. Analyst Gary Kuever's chart shows M3-plus-credit, short term, from May 2000 to September 2006
Bob Chapman, who issued a reconstructed M3 estimate to the 100,000 subscribers to his newsletter, "The International Forecaster", agrees.
"The world is awash in money and credit," Chapman told WND. "My numbers show M3 increasing at about a 10-percent rate right now."
Chapman believes the U.S. economy entered a recession in February. In his newsletter of Dec. 9 he predicted the Fed would hold interest rates at 5.25 percent.
"The Fed is in a very tough spot here," Chapman wrote, "If they raise rates, the real estate market will collapse, and if they lower rates, the dollar will collapse."
Meeting yesterday, the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee voted, as Chapman had predicted, to hold the overnight lending rates between banks steady at 5.25 percent. This was the fourth straight meeting the Fed had voted not to change rates. In its rate announcement, the Fed affirmed the economy had slowed.
Almost immediately after the announcement of the Fed's decision, the dollar weakened to a new 20-month low against the euro, with currency markets reportedly pricing in the expectation the Fed will be forced to lower rates next year to bolster the economy. Following the announcement by the Fed, the U.S. Dollar Index, or USDX, also dropped, with the dollar going below 83.
A dollar collapse is imminent, Chapman declared.
"Technicians studying the USDX think there is a support level for the dollar at 75, but I don't think so."
How low could the dollar go?
"If the dollar breaks through 78.33 on the USDX," Chapman answered, "my guess is the dollar will go through a 35-percent correction, which would put it at 55."
"The key in how low the dollar goes is the interest rates," Chapman told WND. "In January, the Fed is going to have to make a decision which way to go. If Fed rates go up, the dollar will hold in the 78.33 range, but the stock market and the economy will tank. If next year the Fed lowers rates to keep the economy from crashing, the bottom will fall out of the dollar, and I see it going as low as 55. Once the dollar hits bottom, it will take the stock market and the economy right with it anyway. The Fed is in a box they can't get out of."
As WND reported earlier this week, in an unusual move, the Bush administration is sending virtually the entire economic "A-team" to visit China for a "strategic economic dialogue" in Beijing Thursday and Friday. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke are leading the delegation, along with five other cabinet-level officials, including Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez. Also in the delegation will be Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, and U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab.
But Chapman doubts the trip will help the Fed to engineer a slow dollar slide.
"The Chinese are going to do what the Chinese want to do, not what we want them to do," he said. "I believe the Chinese are going to send Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Bernanke home packing, with little or nothing to show for the trip."
How severe will the coming dollar collapse be?
"People in the U.S. are going to be hit hard," Chapman warned. "In the severe recession we are entering now, Bush will argue that we have to form a North American Union to compete with the Euro."
"Creating the amero," Chapman explained, "will be presented to the American public as the administration's solution for dollar recovery. In the process of creating the amero, the Bush administration just abandons the dollar."
Analysts: Dollar collapse would result in 'amero'
Think deep recession likely
regardless of Fed's actions
Posted: December 13, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Two analysts who have reconstructed money supply data after the Fed stopped publishing it argue a coming dollar collapse will set the stage for creating the amero as a North American currency to replace the dollar.
The reconstructed M3 data – the broadest measure of money – published on econometrician Gary Kuever's website, NowAndFutures.com, shows M3 increased at a rate of 11 percent in May, compared to 9 percent when the Federal Reserve quit publishing M3 data earlier this year.
Asked why the Fed decided to stop publishing M3 data, Kuever told WND, "The Fed probably wants to hide how much liquidity is being pumped into the market, and I expect the trend to keep pumping liquidity into the market will continue, especially since the economy is slowing down."
Why is this important?
"The trend line in my M3-plus-debt chart is staggering," Kuever said. "There has been a straight, long-term trend line of M3-plus-credit increasing since 2000. Long-term, we are creating inflation and the dollar has lost almost 98 percent of its value in the past 100 years."
Kuever, a retired investor, is concerned that with growing budget and trade deficits "the dollar could collapse."
"Especially if the Fed cannot increase rates, because we have already entered a recession," he said. Analyst Gary Kuever's chart shows M3-plus-credit, short term, from May 2000 to September 2006
Bob Chapman, who issued a reconstructed M3 estimate to the 100,000 subscribers to his newsletter, "The International Forecaster", agrees.
"The world is awash in money and credit," Chapman told WND. "My numbers show M3 increasing at about a 10-percent rate right now."
Chapman believes the U.S. economy entered a recession in February. In his newsletter of Dec. 9 he predicted the Fed would hold interest rates at 5.25 percent.
"The Fed is in a very tough spot here," Chapman wrote, "If they raise rates, the real estate market will collapse, and if they lower rates, the dollar will collapse."
Meeting yesterday, the Federal Reserve Open Market Committee voted, as Chapman had predicted, to hold the overnight lending rates between banks steady at 5.25 percent. This was the fourth straight meeting the Fed had voted not to change rates. In its rate announcement, the Fed affirmed the economy had slowed.
Almost immediately after the announcement of the Fed's decision, the dollar weakened to a new 20-month low against the euro, with currency markets reportedly pricing in the expectation the Fed will be forced to lower rates next year to bolster the economy. Following the announcement by the Fed, the U.S. Dollar Index, or USDX, also dropped, with the dollar going below 83.
A dollar collapse is imminent, Chapman declared.
"Technicians studying the USDX think there is a support level for the dollar at 75, but I don't think so."
How low could the dollar go?
"If the dollar breaks through 78.33 on the USDX," Chapman answered, "my guess is the dollar will go through a 35-percent correction, which would put it at 55."
"The key in how low the dollar goes is the interest rates," Chapman told WND. "In January, the Fed is going to have to make a decision which way to go. If Fed rates go up, the dollar will hold in the 78.33 range, but the stock market and the economy will tank. If next year the Fed lowers rates to keep the economy from crashing, the bottom will fall out of the dollar, and I see it going as low as 55. Once the dollar hits bottom, it will take the stock market and the economy right with it anyway. The Fed is in a box they can't get out of."
As WND reported earlier this week, in an unusual move, the Bush administration is sending virtually the entire economic "A-team" to visit China for a "strategic economic dialogue" in Beijing Thursday and Friday. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke are leading the delegation, along with five other cabinet-level officials, including Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutierrez. Also in the delegation will be Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt, Energy Secretary Sam Bodman, and U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab.
But Chapman doubts the trip will help the Fed to engineer a slow dollar slide.
"The Chinese are going to do what the Chinese want to do, not what we want them to do," he said. "I believe the Chinese are going to send Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Bernanke home packing, with little or nothing to show for the trip."
How severe will the coming dollar collapse be?
"People in the U.S. are going to be hit hard," Chapman warned. "In the severe recession we are entering now, Bush will argue that we have to form a North American Union to compete with the Euro."
"Creating the amero," Chapman explained, "will be presented to the American public as the administration's solution for dollar recovery. In the process of creating the amero, the Bush administration just abandons the dollar."
The Soros Threat To Democracy
http://ibdeditorial.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275526219598836
The Soros Threat To Democracy
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, September 24, 2007
Democracy: George Soros is known for funding groups such as MoveOn.org that seek to manipulate public opinion. So why is the billionaire's backing of what he believes in problematic? In a word: transparency.
How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely "NASA whistleblower" standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros' Open Society Institute , which gave him "legal and media advice"?
That's right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros' flagship "philanthropy," by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI's "politicization of science" program.
That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news to push his agenda and lawyers pressuring officials to let him spout his supposedly "censored" spiel for weeks in the name of advancing the global warming agenda.
Hansen even succeeded, with public pressure from his nightly news performances, in forcing NASA to change its media policies to his advantage. Had Hansen's OSI-funding been known, the public might have viewed the whole production differently. The outcome could have been different.
That's not the only case. Didn't the mainstream media report that 2006's vast immigration rallies across the country began as a spontaneous uprising of 2 million angry Mexican-flag waving illegal immigrants demanding U.S. citizenship in Los Angeles, egged on only by a local Spanish-language radio announcer?
Turns out that wasn't what happened, either. Soros' OSI had money-muscle there, too, through its $17 million Justice Fund. The fund lists 19 projects in 2006. One was vaguely described involvement in the immigration rallies. Another project funded illegal immigrant activist groups for subsequent court cases.
So what looked like a wildfire grassroots movement really was a manipulation from OSI's glassy Manhattan offices. The public had no way of knowing until the release of OSI's 2006 annual report.
Meanwhile, OSI cash backed terrorist-friendly court rulings, too.
Do people know last year's Supreme Court ruling abolishing special military commissions for terrorists at Guantanamo was a Soros project? OSI gave support to Georgetown lawyers in 2006 to win Hamdan v. Rumsfeld — for the terrorists.
OSI also gave cash to other radicals who pressured the Transportation Security Administration to scrap a program called "Secure Flight," which matched flight passenger lists with terrorist names. It gave more cash to other left-wing lawyers who persuaded a Texas judge to block cell phone tracking of terrorists.
They trumpeted this as a victory for civil liberties. Feel safer?
It's all part of the $74 million OSI spent on "U.S. Programs" in 2006 to "shape policy." Who knows what revelations 2007's report will bring around events now in the news?
OSI isn't the only secretive organization that Soros funds. OSI partners with the Tides Foundation, which funnels cash from wealthy donors who may not want it known that their cash goes to fringe groups engaged in "direct action" — also known as eco-terrorism.
On the political front, Soros has a great influence in a secretive organization called "Democracy Alliance" whose idea of democracy seems to be government controlled solely of Democrats.
"As with everything about the Democracy Alliance, the strangest aspect of this entire process was the incessant secrecy. Among the alliance's stated values was a commitment to political transparency — as long as it didn't apply to the alliance," wrote Matt Bai, describing how the alliance was formed in 2005, in his book "The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics."
Soros' "shaping public policies," as OSI calls it, is not illegal. But it's a problem for democracy because it drives issues with cash and then only lets the public know about it after it's old news.
That means the public makes decisions about issues without understanding the special agendas of groups behind them.
Without more transparency, it amounts to political manipulation. This leads to cynicism. As word of these short-term covert ops gets out, the public grows to distrust what it hears and tunes out.
The irony here is that Soros claims to be an advocate of an "open society." His OSI does just the legal minimum to disclose its activities. The public shouldn't have to wait until an annual report is out before the light is flipped on about the Open Society's political action.
______________________________________
MY COMMENTS:
ENOUGH SAID!
The Soros Threat To Democracy
By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Monday, September 24, 2007
Democracy: George Soros is known for funding groups such as MoveOn.org that seek to manipulate public opinion. So why is the billionaire's backing of what he believes in problematic? In a word: transparency.
How many people, for instance, know that James Hansen, a man billed as a lonely "NASA whistleblower" standing up to the mighty U.S. government, was really funded by Soros' Open Society Institute , which gave him "legal and media advice"?
That's right, Hansen was packaged for the media by Soros' flagship "philanthropy," by as much as $720,000, most likely under the OSI's "politicization of science" program.
That may have meant that Hansen had media flacks help him get on the evening news to push his agenda and lawyers pressuring officials to let him spout his supposedly "censored" spiel for weeks in the name of advancing the global warming agenda.
Hansen even succeeded, with public pressure from his nightly news performances, in forcing NASA to change its media policies to his advantage. Had Hansen's OSI-funding been known, the public might have viewed the whole production differently. The outcome could have been different.
That's not the only case. Didn't the mainstream media report that 2006's vast immigration rallies across the country began as a spontaneous uprising of 2 million angry Mexican-flag waving illegal immigrants demanding U.S. citizenship in Los Angeles, egged on only by a local Spanish-language radio announcer?
Turns out that wasn't what happened, either. Soros' OSI had money-muscle there, too, through its $17 million Justice Fund. The fund lists 19 projects in 2006. One was vaguely described involvement in the immigration rallies. Another project funded illegal immigrant activist groups for subsequent court cases.
So what looked like a wildfire grassroots movement really was a manipulation from OSI's glassy Manhattan offices. The public had no way of knowing until the release of OSI's 2006 annual report.
Meanwhile, OSI cash backed terrorist-friendly court rulings, too.
Do people know last year's Supreme Court ruling abolishing special military commissions for terrorists at Guantanamo was a Soros project? OSI gave support to Georgetown lawyers in 2006 to win Hamdan v. Rumsfeld — for the terrorists.
OSI also gave cash to other radicals who pressured the Transportation Security Administration to scrap a program called "Secure Flight," which matched flight passenger lists with terrorist names. It gave more cash to other left-wing lawyers who persuaded a Texas judge to block cell phone tracking of terrorists.
They trumpeted this as a victory for civil liberties. Feel safer?
It's all part of the $74 million OSI spent on "U.S. Programs" in 2006 to "shape policy." Who knows what revelations 2007's report will bring around events now in the news?
OSI isn't the only secretive organization that Soros funds. OSI partners with the Tides Foundation, which funnels cash from wealthy donors who may not want it known that their cash goes to fringe groups engaged in "direct action" — also known as eco-terrorism.
On the political front, Soros has a great influence in a secretive organization called "Democracy Alliance" whose idea of democracy seems to be government controlled solely of Democrats.
"As with everything about the Democracy Alliance, the strangest aspect of this entire process was the incessant secrecy. Among the alliance's stated values was a commitment to political transparency — as long as it didn't apply to the alliance," wrote Matt Bai, describing how the alliance was formed in 2005, in his book "The Argument: Billionaires, Bloggers and the Battle to Remake Democratic Politics."
Soros' "shaping public policies," as OSI calls it, is not illegal. But it's a problem for democracy because it drives issues with cash and then only lets the public know about it after it's old news.
That means the public makes decisions about issues without understanding the special agendas of groups behind them.
Without more transparency, it amounts to political manipulation. This leads to cynicism. As word of these short-term covert ops gets out, the public grows to distrust what it hears and tunes out.
The irony here is that Soros claims to be an advocate of an "open society." His OSI does just the legal minimum to disclose its activities. The public shouldn't have to wait until an annual report is out before the light is flipped on about the Open Society's political action.
______________________________________
MY COMMENTS:
ENOUGH SAID!
FBI Investigating Suspected 'Sabotage' of Commuter Train Tracks in Chicago
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070927/railroad_sabotage.html?.v=1
FBI Investigating Train Track 'Sabotage'
Thursday September 27, 8:24 am ET
FBI Investigating Suspected 'Sabotage' of Commuter Train Tracks in Chicago
CHICAGO (AP) -- The FBI is investigating whether a section of commuter train tracks was sabotaged after Metra workers discovered a dozen railroad spikes missing in an area on Chicago's South Side.
The spikes hold down metal plates that bind the rails to wooden ties underneath.
"If a sufficient number of spikes are removed in a contained location, there's the potential for the rail to shift, which would lead to disastrous results and train derailment," said Federal Railroad Administration spokesman Steve Kulm.
Metra discovered the missing spikes on Monday and notified police and federal authorities, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, which investigates threats to planes and trains.
The FBI said it was conducting a criminal investigation into "sabotage." FBI spokesman Ross Rice said agents were checking for possible connections to a domestic violence case involving a Metra engineer.
The affected tracks carry three commuter lines, including the Metra Electric Line to University Park and Blue Island, with around 40,000 riders daily, and the South Shore Line to Michigan City and South Bend, Ind.
FBI Investigating Train Track 'Sabotage'
Thursday September 27, 8:24 am ET
FBI Investigating Suspected 'Sabotage' of Commuter Train Tracks in Chicago
CHICAGO (AP) -- The FBI is investigating whether a section of commuter train tracks was sabotaged after Metra workers discovered a dozen railroad spikes missing in an area on Chicago's South Side.
The spikes hold down metal plates that bind the rails to wooden ties underneath.
"If a sufficient number of spikes are removed in a contained location, there's the potential for the rail to shift, which would lead to disastrous results and train derailment," said Federal Railroad Administration spokesman Steve Kulm.
Metra discovered the missing spikes on Monday and notified police and federal authorities, including the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, which investigates threats to planes and trains.
The FBI said it was conducting a criminal investigation into "sabotage." FBI spokesman Ross Rice said agents were checking for possible connections to a domestic violence case involving a Metra engineer.
The affected tracks carry three commuter lines, including the Metra Electric Line to University Park and Blue Island, with around 40,000 riders daily, and the South Shore Line to Michigan City and South Bend, Ind.
Hillary flip-flops, contradicts Bill - & herself - in N.H. debate
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/2007/09/26/2007-09-26_hillary_flipflops_contradicts_bill___her.html
Hillary flip-flops, contradicts Bill - & herself - in N.H. debate
BY IAN BISHOP and MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Thursday, September 27th 2007, 1:58 AM
Sen. Hillary Clinton fields question during Democratic debate yesterday in New Hampshire, where she contradicted hubby Bill, as well as herself, insisting she'd never OK torture of terror suspects.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HANOVER, N.H. - Sen. Hillary Clinton scored with a Democratic audience last night by contradicting her husband's belief that a terrorist could be tortured to foil an imminent plot - but what observers didn't know is she was contradicting herself, too.
"It cannot be American policy, period," Clinton (D-N.Y.) told debate moderator Tim Russert, who asked if there should be a presidential exemption to allow the torture of a terror chieftain if authorities knew a bomb was about to go off, but didn't know where it was.
When Russert revealed ex-President Bill Clinton advocated such a policy on a recent NBC "Meet the Press" appearance, Hillary Clinton won huge applause from the Dartmouth College audience with a deadpan comeback:
"Well, I'll talk to him later."
She may have to give herself that talk, too.
Last October, Clinton told the Daily News: "If we're going to bepreparing for the kind of improbable but possible eventuality, then it has to be done within the rule of law."
She said then the "ticking time bomb" scenario represents a narrow exception to her opposition to torture as morally wrong, ineffective and dangerous to American soldiers.
"In the event we were ever confronted with having to interrogate a detainee with knowledge of an imminent threat to millions of Americans, then the decision to depart from standard international practices must be made by the President, and the President must be held accountable," she said.
Clinton's campaign did not immediately respond to numerous requests for comment on the eye-popping contradiction.
Her pirouette came during a debate at Dartmouth in which Democratic rivals declared open season on Clinton - and Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani, too.
The ex-New York mayor came under fire for voicing his readiness to attack Iran to keep it from developing nuclear weapons. Clinton was accused by some of her rivals of playing into President Bush's hands by voting for an anti-Iran Senate resolution.
"I think what Mayor Giuliani said was irresponsible, because we have not yet come to that point," said Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), arguing there is a lot of diplomacy to be done first.
"Rudy Giuliani doesn't know what the heck he's talking about," zinged Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.). "He's the most uninformed person on American foreign policy now running for President."
Giuliani's campaign declined to respond.
Former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) hit Clinton for voting yesterday to name Iran's elite Republican Guard a sponsor of terrorism - which he said was the first step to war with Iran and all too similar to the vote both cast for the Iraq war. Cantankerous former Sen. Mike Gravel (D-Alaska) pointed at her and said, "I am ashamed of you, Hillary."
Clinton defended her vote, saying it would let the U.S. "impose sanctions on the primary leaders to try to begin to put some teeth into all this talk about dealing with Iran." She said there was much to to be done to try to achieve a political solution before discussing military options.
Several times she refused to give answers, but she couldn't duck when Russert threw her a curveball, asking if she would back the Yankees or Chicago Cubs, her childhood home team, if they met in the World Series. So she waffled.
"Well, I would probably have to alternate sides," she said.
mmcauliff@nydailynews.com
----------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Ha! Ha! Ha! This was hillary-ious! Typical Hillary "Well, I would probably have to alternate sides."
I just cannot belive how many ignorant people out there honestly think she care about the little person. Well, on the other hand she hates the Middle Class. She infuriates me!
Hillary flip-flops, contradicts Bill - & herself - in N.H. debate
BY IAN BISHOP and MICHAEL McAULIFF
DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITERS
Thursday, September 27th 2007, 1:58 AM
Sen. Hillary Clinton fields question during Democratic debate yesterday in New Hampshire, where she contradicted hubby Bill, as well as herself, insisting she'd never OK torture of terror suspects.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
HANOVER, N.H. - Sen. Hillary Clinton scored with a Democratic audience last night by contradicting her husband's belief that a terrorist could be tortured to foil an imminent plot - but what observers didn't know is she was contradicting herself, too.
"It cannot be American policy, period," Clinton (D-N.Y.) told debate moderator Tim Russert, who asked if there should be a presidential exemption to allow the torture of a terror chieftain if authorities knew a bomb was about to go off, but didn't know where it was.
When Russert revealed ex-President Bill Clinton advocated such a policy on a recent NBC "Meet the Press" appearance, Hillary Clinton won huge applause from the Dartmouth College audience with a deadpan comeback:
"Well, I'll talk to him later."
She may have to give herself that talk, too.
Last October, Clinton told the Daily News: "If we're going to bepreparing for the kind of improbable but possible eventuality, then it has to be done within the rule of law."
She said then the "ticking time bomb" scenario represents a narrow exception to her opposition to torture as morally wrong, ineffective and dangerous to American soldiers.
"In the event we were ever confronted with having to interrogate a detainee with knowledge of an imminent threat to millions of Americans, then the decision to depart from standard international practices must be made by the President, and the President must be held accountable," she said.
Clinton's campaign did not immediately respond to numerous requests for comment on the eye-popping contradiction.
Her pirouette came during a debate at Dartmouth in which Democratic rivals declared open season on Clinton - and Republican front-runner Rudy Giuliani, too.
The ex-New York mayor came under fire for voicing his readiness to attack Iran to keep it from developing nuclear weapons. Clinton was accused by some of her rivals of playing into President Bush's hands by voting for an anti-Iran Senate resolution.
"I think what Mayor Giuliani said was irresponsible, because we have not yet come to that point," said Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), arguing there is a lot of diplomacy to be done first.
"Rudy Giuliani doesn't know what the heck he's talking about," zinged Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.). "He's the most uninformed person on American foreign policy now running for President."
Giuliani's campaign declined to respond.
Former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) hit Clinton for voting yesterday to name Iran's elite Republican Guard a sponsor of terrorism - which he said was the first step to war with Iran and all too similar to the vote both cast for the Iraq war. Cantankerous former Sen. Mike Gravel (D-Alaska) pointed at her and said, "I am ashamed of you, Hillary."
Clinton defended her vote, saying it would let the U.S. "impose sanctions on the primary leaders to try to begin to put some teeth into all this talk about dealing with Iran." She said there was much to to be done to try to achieve a political solution before discussing military options.
Several times she refused to give answers, but she couldn't duck when Russert threw her a curveball, asking if she would back the Yankees or Chicago Cubs, her childhood home team, if they met in the World Series. So she waffled.
"Well, I would probably have to alternate sides," she said.
mmcauliff@nydailynews.com
----------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Ha! Ha! Ha! This was hillary-ious! Typical Hillary "Well, I would probably have to alternate sides."
I just cannot belive how many ignorant people out there honestly think she care about the little person. Well, on the other hand she hates the Middle Class. She infuriates me!
Hsu's money was it, anyway?
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57844
Hsu's money was it, anyway?
Craig McMillan
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
In many ways, the story of Norman Hsu is a story in miniature of today's Democratic Party.
Mr. Hsu:
Took money from one group of people and gave it to another.
In the "giving" process, he made himself look good to the recipients.
Did not care about the people he hurt by stealing from them. All that mattered was the influence his "gifts" bought.
The Democrats:
Take money from one group of people (taxpayers) and give it to another (public employees and welfare recipients).
Paint themselves as the party of "compassion," although their "gifts" are stolen from other people through coercion and the threat of violence.
Don't care about the damage they do to the people they steal from – all that matters is spreading enough money around to buy another re[election term.
One of Mr. Hsu's favored techniques was "bundling." According to the Chicago Tribune ("Hsu is accused of Ponzi scheme," by Tom Hamburger of the Los Angeles Times, Sept. 21), Mrs. Clinton received 260 individual contributions totaling $850,000 from Mr. Hsu. These the Clinton campaign is now "returning."
Of course, if these people don't actually exist, all this money comes back to the Clinton campaign. (Mail undeliverable as addressed. Unable to forward.)
But what happens if people didn't know they "gave"? "Hey, Frieda! What the heck are you doing? Why'd you give Hillary Clinton $3,269? And who's Norman Hsu?"
Campaign finance reform, of course, was the magic bullet designed to prevent just these kinds of abuses. No more "fat cats" buying favors from the politicos with wads of cash. No more influence-peddling. Just campaign nirvana, where every campaign is supported by committed, passionate, small donors (bundled together in groups of 260) giving because they believe in the candidate.
Mr. Hsu certainly seems to have had the commitment and passion of at least 260 small donors in his funding efforts for the Clinton campaign. While it's possible Hsu was operating from his own admiration (multiplied 260 times) for Mrs. Clinton, he may have been fulfilling another role as well.
Certainly, if you were a very large donor who was committed and passionate about Mrs. Clinton's campaign, a man like Norman Hsu might come in very handy. Large sums of money can be given to political parties – but not individual candidates. So a large contribution given to the Democratic Party and intended for Mrs. Clinton might well find its way to – gasp, Mr. Obama's campaign. Especially if the people in the Democratic Party didn't particularly share your enthusiasm for the Clintons. (Howard Dean comes to mind.)
In the midst of such uncertainties, a man like Mr. Hsu might well be the answer to a political fat cat's prayers. It may be that the proper way to think about Norman Hsu is as a gift wrapper operating the concession at a fancy downtown department store over the holidays. By collecting money for vague "business deals" from unspecified "investors" – then parceling this money out as individual political gifts of the amount the law allows and filling out gift tags with the names of many small shoppers at the store – well, for someone who's not enamored with Christmas, it certainly worked out well for Mrs. Clinton, didn't it?
When push comes to shove, the "investors" were cheated out of their funds by Mr. Hsu and can write the loss off on their taxes. They are the victims – and Mr. Hsu the bad guy. Gift tags are strewn everywhere, but the money seems to have vanished.
--------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Well, my opinion of Hillary and most of the democrats are that they are Socialist scum. We all know most of these campaign contributions came from illegal sources and my likely international interest groups (china mostly). SHOCKING! Gasp!
Hsu's money was it, anyway?
Craig McMillan
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
In many ways, the story of Norman Hsu is a story in miniature of today's Democratic Party.
Mr. Hsu:
Took money from one group of people and gave it to another.
In the "giving" process, he made himself look good to the recipients.
Did not care about the people he hurt by stealing from them. All that mattered was the influence his "gifts" bought.
The Democrats:
Take money from one group of people (taxpayers) and give it to another (public employees and welfare recipients).
Paint themselves as the party of "compassion," although their "gifts" are stolen from other people through coercion and the threat of violence.
Don't care about the damage they do to the people they steal from – all that matters is spreading enough money around to buy another re[election term.
One of Mr. Hsu's favored techniques was "bundling." According to the Chicago Tribune ("Hsu is accused of Ponzi scheme," by Tom Hamburger of the Los Angeles Times, Sept. 21), Mrs. Clinton received 260 individual contributions totaling $850,000 from Mr. Hsu. These the Clinton campaign is now "returning."
Of course, if these people don't actually exist, all this money comes back to the Clinton campaign. (Mail undeliverable as addressed. Unable to forward.)
But what happens if people didn't know they "gave"? "Hey, Frieda! What the heck are you doing? Why'd you give Hillary Clinton $3,269? And who's Norman Hsu?"
Campaign finance reform, of course, was the magic bullet designed to prevent just these kinds of abuses. No more "fat cats" buying favors from the politicos with wads of cash. No more influence-peddling. Just campaign nirvana, where every campaign is supported by committed, passionate, small donors (bundled together in groups of 260) giving because they believe in the candidate.
Mr. Hsu certainly seems to have had the commitment and passion of at least 260 small donors in his funding efforts for the Clinton campaign. While it's possible Hsu was operating from his own admiration (multiplied 260 times) for Mrs. Clinton, he may have been fulfilling another role as well.
Certainly, if you were a very large donor who was committed and passionate about Mrs. Clinton's campaign, a man like Norman Hsu might come in very handy. Large sums of money can be given to political parties – but not individual candidates. So a large contribution given to the Democratic Party and intended for Mrs. Clinton might well find its way to – gasp, Mr. Obama's campaign. Especially if the people in the Democratic Party didn't particularly share your enthusiasm for the Clintons. (Howard Dean comes to mind.)
In the midst of such uncertainties, a man like Mr. Hsu might well be the answer to a political fat cat's prayers. It may be that the proper way to think about Norman Hsu is as a gift wrapper operating the concession at a fancy downtown department store over the holidays. By collecting money for vague "business deals" from unspecified "investors" – then parceling this money out as individual political gifts of the amount the law allows and filling out gift tags with the names of many small shoppers at the store – well, for someone who's not enamored with Christmas, it certainly worked out well for Mrs. Clinton, didn't it?
When push comes to shove, the "investors" were cheated out of their funds by Mr. Hsu and can write the loss off on their taxes. They are the victims – and Mr. Hsu the bad guy. Gift tags are strewn everywhere, but the money seems to have vanished.
--------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
Well, my opinion of Hillary and most of the democrats are that they are Socialist scum. We all know most of these campaign contributions came from illegal sources and my likely international interest groups (china mostly). SHOCKING! Gasp!
U.S. for sale to foreigners by Texas hold'em rules
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57857
U.S. for sale to foreigners by Texas hold'em rules
Officials at secret confab learn of 'lawyer feeding frenzy' over release of infrastructure
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Establishing public-private partnerships that give away control of U.S. infrastructure to foreigners is like playing the casino game "Texas hold'em," a top Texas Department of Transportation official told the EuroMoney conference meeting yesterday in the plush Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City.
James Bass, the chief financial officer of TxDOT, was speaking on the second day of a two-day seminar devoted to teaching state government officials how to lease public assets to foreign investment interests.
"Sure, you can expect political objections," Bass told the conference, "but if you play your cards right, you'll win."
WND reported last week EuroMoney shut out WND from the conference, refusing the $1,999 registration fee because WND was "too political" to attend.
Throughout the conference yesterday, various attendees telephoned WND to provide detailed, inside accounts on conference proceedings.
As WND has reported, campaign contributions to Gov. Rick Perry paved the way for TxDOT to build the Trans-Texas Corridor, a four football-fields-wide truck-car-train-pipeline to run parallel to I-35. In the PPP deal, Cintra, a Spanish investment concern, will own the toll rights on the superhighway for 50 years after it is built.
Speaking to the conference about a deal in Colorado, Denver attorney Edward Icenogle said, "It was a lawyer feeding frenzy."
"We had so many lawyers involved in the deal that we almost ran out of law firms in Denver to hire," he said.
Icenogle is a lead lawyer for the 11-mile Northwest Parkway, a Denver-area toll road that locals widely call the "Billion Dollar Boondoggle."
Hostile questioners from the EuroMoney conference audience pressed Icenogle to justify millions of taxpayer dollars required to hire the "army of attorneys" needed to structure the Northwest Parkway private-public partnership, or P3, deal.
Icenogle rejected characterizing the Northwest Parkway as a "conspiracy of lawyers," but he did concede the P3 deals were lawyer-intensive, generally demanding complicated revisions of state law and negotiations with foreign attorneys in multiple languages.
Icenogle appeared on a panel giving an update to the Northwest Parkway, along with Karen Stuart, the mayor of Broomfield, Colo., who is leading the move to lease the toll road under a P3 deal with Portugal and Brazil.
Stuart defended a move to accept some $500 million from a private investment consortium composed of Portugal's Brisa Auto-Estradas and their Brazilian partner Companhia de Concessoes Rodoviarias. The foreign firms want to operate the toll road under a 99-year lease in which they would receive the tolls.
At the conclusion of the Northwest Parkway panel, a questioner from the audience asked Stuart why, if the P3 deal was so good for the Portuguese and Brazilian investment concerns, was the project taken from public ownership?
Stuart answered that there were complex risks involved in getting enough toll-road riders to cover construction costs.
Locals in the Denver area joke that children should use the Northwest Parkway central lanes as bicycle paths given the lack of motorists.
Critics in Colorado argue the Northwest Parkway is bankrupt and Fitch, a bond rating agency, has downgraded some $420 million in outstanding Northwest Parkway bonds to CCC+ grading, with a "negative" rating outlook, a status usually reserved for junk bonds.
Ray Medina, president of Citizens Involved in the NW Quadrant, has been quoted as criticizing Broomfield for making "a poor decision to financially support an ill-conceived toll road," arguing the Northwest Parkway has "saddled Broomfield taxpayers with a huge debt that the Broomfield government is scrambling to find a way out."
Stuart defended the deal but was forced to concede the Northwest Parkway was struggling to meet traffic projections and its high tolls remain a barrier.
The conference ended with Mark Florian and Gregory Carey, managing directors from Goldman Sachs, explaining how state lotteries and sports stadiums could be privatized to foreign investors under P3 deals.
Elizabeth Rao, assistant general nanager and head of "FasTracks" at RFD transit in Denver, told the group her department retained outside lawyers and hired additional staff as they prepared to explore P3 foreign financing to privatize Denver's light rail.
Rao claimed the savings to the taxpayers would only be in the range of about 5 percent after the deal was done.
Approximate 300 attendees, including officials from state and city departments of transportation, listened for two days as lawyers and investment bankers explained the legal documents and financing structures needed to sell a wide range of public infrastructure to foreigners.
"Under P3, the USA is up for sale," a conference attendee told WND by telephone at the conclusion of the meeting. "Whatever the public now owns – roads, ports, waste management water systems, rail lines, public parking facilities, airports, even lotteries and sports stadiums – are up for grabs and the only requirement is that the foreigners have the cash."
----------------------------------------------------------------
MY NOTES:
URGH!!!! THIS IS A MESS.... If only the American people would wake up and see that our country is being sold out from under us. But no, Americans are to busy watching some reality TV show to know what the true Reality is.
U.S. for sale to foreigners by Texas hold'em rules
Officials at secret confab learn of 'lawyer feeding frenzy' over release of infrastructure
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Establishing public-private partnerships that give away control of U.S. infrastructure to foreigners is like playing the casino game "Texas hold'em," a top Texas Department of Transportation official told the EuroMoney conference meeting yesterday in the plush Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York City.
James Bass, the chief financial officer of TxDOT, was speaking on the second day of a two-day seminar devoted to teaching state government officials how to lease public assets to foreign investment interests.
"Sure, you can expect political objections," Bass told the conference, "but if you play your cards right, you'll win."
WND reported last week EuroMoney shut out WND from the conference, refusing the $1,999 registration fee because WND was "too political" to attend.
Throughout the conference yesterday, various attendees telephoned WND to provide detailed, inside accounts on conference proceedings.
As WND has reported, campaign contributions to Gov. Rick Perry paved the way for TxDOT to build the Trans-Texas Corridor, a four football-fields-wide truck-car-train-pipeline to run parallel to I-35. In the PPP deal, Cintra, a Spanish investment concern, will own the toll rights on the superhighway for 50 years after it is built.
Speaking to the conference about a deal in Colorado, Denver attorney Edward Icenogle said, "It was a lawyer feeding frenzy."
"We had so many lawyers involved in the deal that we almost ran out of law firms in Denver to hire," he said.
Icenogle is a lead lawyer for the 11-mile Northwest Parkway, a Denver-area toll road that locals widely call the "Billion Dollar Boondoggle."
Hostile questioners from the EuroMoney conference audience pressed Icenogle to justify millions of taxpayer dollars required to hire the "army of attorneys" needed to structure the Northwest Parkway private-public partnership, or P3, deal.
Icenogle rejected characterizing the Northwest Parkway as a "conspiracy of lawyers," but he did concede the P3 deals were lawyer-intensive, generally demanding complicated revisions of state law and negotiations with foreign attorneys in multiple languages.
Icenogle appeared on a panel giving an update to the Northwest Parkway, along with Karen Stuart, the mayor of Broomfield, Colo., who is leading the move to lease the toll road under a P3 deal with Portugal and Brazil.
Stuart defended a move to accept some $500 million from a private investment consortium composed of Portugal's Brisa Auto-Estradas and their Brazilian partner Companhia de Concessoes Rodoviarias. The foreign firms want to operate the toll road under a 99-year lease in which they would receive the tolls.
At the conclusion of the Northwest Parkway panel, a questioner from the audience asked Stuart why, if the P3 deal was so good for the Portuguese and Brazilian investment concerns, was the project taken from public ownership?
Stuart answered that there were complex risks involved in getting enough toll-road riders to cover construction costs.
Locals in the Denver area joke that children should use the Northwest Parkway central lanes as bicycle paths given the lack of motorists.
Critics in Colorado argue the Northwest Parkway is bankrupt and Fitch, a bond rating agency, has downgraded some $420 million in outstanding Northwest Parkway bonds to CCC+ grading, with a "negative" rating outlook, a status usually reserved for junk bonds.
Ray Medina, president of Citizens Involved in the NW Quadrant, has been quoted as criticizing Broomfield for making "a poor decision to financially support an ill-conceived toll road," arguing the Northwest Parkway has "saddled Broomfield taxpayers with a huge debt that the Broomfield government is scrambling to find a way out."
Stuart defended the deal but was forced to concede the Northwest Parkway was struggling to meet traffic projections and its high tolls remain a barrier.
The conference ended with Mark Florian and Gregory Carey, managing directors from Goldman Sachs, explaining how state lotteries and sports stadiums could be privatized to foreign investors under P3 deals.
Elizabeth Rao, assistant general nanager and head of "FasTracks" at RFD transit in Denver, told the group her department retained outside lawyers and hired additional staff as they prepared to explore P3 foreign financing to privatize Denver's light rail.
Rao claimed the savings to the taxpayers would only be in the range of about 5 percent after the deal was done.
Approximate 300 attendees, including officials from state and city departments of transportation, listened for two days as lawyers and investment bankers explained the legal documents and financing structures needed to sell a wide range of public infrastructure to foreigners.
"Under P3, the USA is up for sale," a conference attendee told WND by telephone at the conclusion of the meeting. "Whatever the public now owns – roads, ports, waste management water systems, rail lines, public parking facilities, airports, even lotteries and sports stadiums – are up for grabs and the only requirement is that the foreigners have the cash."
----------------------------------------------------------------
MY NOTES:
URGH!!!! THIS IS A MESS.... If only the American people would wake up and see that our country is being sold out from under us. But no, Americans are to busy watching some reality TV show to know what the true Reality is.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57833
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57833
$180 toll on Holland Tunnel?
Secret NYC confab schemes future for U.S.
Posted: September 26, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Holland Tunnel
"If the Holland Tunnel were run as a public-private partnership, the fee today would be $180, not $6," Dennis Enright, the principal and founder of NW Financial told the EuroMoney conference meeting yesterday in the plush Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City.
Yesterday was the first day of a two-day seminar devoted to teaching state government officials how to lease public assets to foreign investment interests.
WND reported last week EuroMoney kept WND out of the conference, refusing to accept the $1,999 registration fee because WND was "too political" to attend.
Throughout the conference yesterday, various attendees telephoned WND to provide detailed inside accounts on conference proceedings.
In a panel devoted to arguing the case for and against public-private partnerships, Leonard Gilroy of the Reason Foundation disagreed, arguing "just because a public-private contract allows tolls does not mean the private lease holder will charge the full amount."
Waldorf-Astoria in New York City
Gilroy argued Enright was ignoring elasticity of demand and said private operators in PPP deals would have to keep tolls low or lose customers.
Enright retorted that non-compete clauses in PPP contracts give private operators full rein to set prices wherever they want, arguing that if the Holland Tunnel were sold to a private foreign investment concern, the choice would be to pay the $180 toll or find another way across the Hudson River.
Last week in an op-ed piece published on the website of the Los Angeles Times, Gilroy and Shikha Dalmia, a Reason Foundation colleague, attacked opponents of the Trans-Texas Corridor as "xenophobes" engaging in a "paranoid style" of politics.
WND also has reported Oklahoma House Speaker Republican Lance Cargill brought Richard Poole, the founder of the Reason Foundation, to Oklahoma to advocate extending the Trans-Texas Corridor north into Oklahoma via a PPP investment structure.
When asked to vote, a show of hands indicated virtually every attendee in the 300-person audience was in favor of public-private partnerships to structure the next U.S. generation of highways as foreign-operated private toll roads.
A panel of state department of transportation officials discussed the "politics, needs, laws and deals" of PPP highway infrastructure opportunities.
Peg Schmitt, spokeswoman for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, told WND that Kenneth C. Newman, policy and budget director for the Wisconsin DOT, attended the EuroMoney seminar in New York "to talk with people about PPP opportunities and see what other states are doing to advance public-private partnerships."
"Our Secretary of Transportation, Frank Busalacchi, has voiced concerns about P3," Schmitt told WND, "and he has been an outspoken critic of P3 highway financing, even in his testimony to Congress."
Schmitt told WND that since Newman was a panelist, EuroMoney paid his travel expenses to attend the conference, not the Wisconsin DOT.
On Feb. 13, Busalacchi testified to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, "The P3 model comes up short for Wisconsin."
Yet, other states on the panel disagreed. Cedric Grant, assistant secretary of the Louisiana Department of Transportation, told the conference his state looks to the DOTs in Virginia and Texas for P3 advice and consultation.
The PPP section of the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration website confirms the 8.8 mile Pocahontas Parkway toll road is leased for 99 years to an Australian investment consortium in a structure underwritten by Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns.
The Texas Department of Transportation website confirms the Trans-Texas Corridor, the four-football-fields train-automobile-truck-pipeline corridor is being constructed under a 50-year lease PPP contract with the Spain-based consortium Cintra.
At the end of the first day, a panel of private foreign investors told conference attendees foreign private investment capital was more available for PPP infrastructure of U.S. highway projects than U.S. capital.
The panel included representatives from three major private investment consortia in Spain that specialize in highway infrastructure: Cintra, Acciona and OHL.
Investment bankers from the Carlyle Group, Allstate Investments, Nuveen Asset Manager and AIG Highstar told attendees $100 billion was currently available for PPP financing of new private-operated toll roads in the U.S., with the majority of the funds coming from foreign investment interests.
While EuroMoney shut out WND from the conference, various attendees telephoned WND to provide detailed accounts on proceedings.
------------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
DO I really need to tell you how bad PPP is for the common American? Really?
$180 toll on Holland Tunnel?
Secret NYC confab schemes future for U.S.
Posted: September 26, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Holland Tunnel
"If the Holland Tunnel were run as a public-private partnership, the fee today would be $180, not $6," Dennis Enright, the principal and founder of NW Financial told the EuroMoney conference meeting yesterday in the plush Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City.
Yesterday was the first day of a two-day seminar devoted to teaching state government officials how to lease public assets to foreign investment interests.
WND reported last week EuroMoney kept WND out of the conference, refusing to accept the $1,999 registration fee because WND was "too political" to attend.
Throughout the conference yesterday, various attendees telephoned WND to provide detailed inside accounts on conference proceedings.
In a panel devoted to arguing the case for and against public-private partnerships, Leonard Gilroy of the Reason Foundation disagreed, arguing "just because a public-private contract allows tolls does not mean the private lease holder will charge the full amount."
Waldorf-Astoria in New York City
Gilroy argued Enright was ignoring elasticity of demand and said private operators in PPP deals would have to keep tolls low or lose customers.
Enright retorted that non-compete clauses in PPP contracts give private operators full rein to set prices wherever they want, arguing that if the Holland Tunnel were sold to a private foreign investment concern, the choice would be to pay the $180 toll or find another way across the Hudson River.
Last week in an op-ed piece published on the website of the Los Angeles Times, Gilroy and Shikha Dalmia, a Reason Foundation colleague, attacked opponents of the Trans-Texas Corridor as "xenophobes" engaging in a "paranoid style" of politics.
WND also has reported Oklahoma House Speaker Republican Lance Cargill brought Richard Poole, the founder of the Reason Foundation, to Oklahoma to advocate extending the Trans-Texas Corridor north into Oklahoma via a PPP investment structure.
When asked to vote, a show of hands indicated virtually every attendee in the 300-person audience was in favor of public-private partnerships to structure the next U.S. generation of highways as foreign-operated private toll roads.
A panel of state department of transportation officials discussed the "politics, needs, laws and deals" of PPP highway infrastructure opportunities.
Peg Schmitt, spokeswoman for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation, told WND that Kenneth C. Newman, policy and budget director for the Wisconsin DOT, attended the EuroMoney seminar in New York "to talk with people about PPP opportunities and see what other states are doing to advance public-private partnerships."
"Our Secretary of Transportation, Frank Busalacchi, has voiced concerns about P3," Schmitt told WND, "and he has been an outspoken critic of P3 highway financing, even in his testimony to Congress."
Schmitt told WND that since Newman was a panelist, EuroMoney paid his travel expenses to attend the conference, not the Wisconsin DOT.
On Feb. 13, Busalacchi testified to the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, "The P3 model comes up short for Wisconsin."
Yet, other states on the panel disagreed. Cedric Grant, assistant secretary of the Louisiana Department of Transportation, told the conference his state looks to the DOTs in Virginia and Texas for P3 advice and consultation.
The PPP section of the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration website confirms the 8.8 mile Pocahontas Parkway toll road is leased for 99 years to an Australian investment consortium in a structure underwritten by Lehman Brothers and Bear Stearns.
The Texas Department of Transportation website confirms the Trans-Texas Corridor, the four-football-fields train-automobile-truck-pipeline corridor is being constructed under a 50-year lease PPP contract with the Spain-based consortium Cintra.
At the end of the first day, a panel of private foreign investors told conference attendees foreign private investment capital was more available for PPP infrastructure of U.S. highway projects than U.S. capital.
The panel included representatives from three major private investment consortia in Spain that specialize in highway infrastructure: Cintra, Acciona and OHL.
Investment bankers from the Carlyle Group, Allstate Investments, Nuveen Asset Manager and AIG Highstar told attendees $100 billion was currently available for PPP financing of new private-operated toll roads in the U.S., with the majority of the funds coming from foreign investment interests.
While EuroMoney shut out WND from the conference, various attendees telephoned WND to provide detailed accounts on proceedings.
------------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
DO I really need to tell you how bad PPP is for the common American? Really?
Marines Barred From Filming Commercial on Streets of San Francisco
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298039,00.html
Marines Barred From Filming Commercial on Streets of San Francisco
They're the strong and the proud, but the Marines aren't free to stand on the streets of San Francisco.
The Silent Drill Platoon of the U.S. Marine Corps wasn't allowed to be filmed Sept. 11 on California Street in San Francisco for a segment of its new advertising campaign, a Marine spokesman told FOXNews.com.
Instead, the elite group took its austere display to the Golden Gate National Recreation Area for the final segment of its "America's Marines" TV commercial. The group is on a two-month nationwide tour as part of the campaign.
Stefanie Coyote, the executive director of the San Francisco Film Commission, the group that denied the permit, was unavailable for comment Tuesday. Her office referred calls to San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom's press office, which did not immediately return a request for comment.
Coyote told KGO-TV that "traffic control was the issue."
Click here to read KGO-TV's report.
The film commission did allow the Marines' production unit to film the street without Marines. They'll be superimposed in the spot, KGO-TV reports.
Meanwhile, the Silent Drill Platoon continued its campaign, filming a portion of the commercial Monday in New York's Times Square during the early morning rush hour.
The platoon is documenting its journey on the Web site www.Our.Marines.com and plans to film portions of the commercial in Sligo, Ky., on Oct. 6, in the Grand Canyon and at Hoover Dam on Oct. 22 and in the Rocky Mountains on Oct. 30, according to the group's online schedule. The public is invited to attend.
-------------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
WHAT DO YOU EXPECT FROM SUCH A CITY OF SCUM!!!!! The San Francisco Film Commission ought to be ashamed of themselves. "Traffic Control" my ass. Funny how it never seems to be an issue when Hollywood wants to use the bridge for a film, or the gay rights movements want to stage a protest on the bridge or bike across it. This in my opinion is a total slap in the face and I vow I will never give one dime to the San Francisco Film Commission!
Plan Uses Taxes to Fight Climate Change
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/26/AR2007092602127_pf.html
Plan Uses Taxes to Fight Climate Change
By H. JOSEF HEBERT
The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 26, 2007; 7:34 PM
WASHINGTON -- Dealing with global warming will be painful, says one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress. To back up his claim he is proposing a recipe many people won't like _ a 50-cent gasoline tax, a carbon tax and scaling back tax breaks for some home owners.
"I'm trying to have everybody understand that this is going to cost and that it's going to have a measure of pain that you're not going to like," Rep. John Dingell, who is marking his 52nd year in Congress, said Wednesday in an interview with The Associated Press.
Dingell will offer a "discussion draft" outlining his tax proposals on Thursday, the same day that President Bush holds a two-day conference to discuss voluntary efforts to combat climate change.
But Dingell, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that will craft climate legislation, is making it clear that he believes tackling global warming will require a lot more if it is to be taken seriously.
"This is going to cause pain," he said, adding that he wants to make certain "the pain is shared in a way that is fair, proper, acceptable and accomplishes the basic purpose" of reducing greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels.
Dingell said he's not sure what the final climate package will include when the House takes it up for a vote. The taxes measures he's proposing, in fact, will be taken up by another House committee. And the Senate is considering a market-based system that would set an economy-wide ceiling on the amount of carbon dioxide that would be allowed to be released.
Dingell says he hasn't rule out such a so-called "cap-and-trade" system, either, but that at least for now he wants to float what he believes is a better idea. He will propose for discussion:
_A 50-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline and jet fuel, phased in over five years, on top of existing taxes.
_A tax on carbon, at $50 a ton, released from burning coal, petroleum or natural gas.
_Phaseout of the interest tax deduction on home mortgages for homes over 3,000 square feet. Owners would keep most of the deduction for homes at the lower end of the scale, but it would be eliminated entirely for homes of 4,200 feet or more.
He estimates that would affect 10 percent of homeowners. He says "it's only fair" to tax those who buy large suburban houses and create urban sprawl. Historic and farm houses would be exempted.
Some of the revenue would be used to reduce payroll taxes, but most would go elsewhere including for highway construction, mass transit, paying for Social Security and health programs and to help the poor pay energy bills.
In the interview Wednesday, Dingell acknowledged he's tackling some of the most sacred of political cows. He's not sure if they will end up in the climate legislation, but he wants to open them for discussion.
"All my friends tell me you can't do this, it's going to be political poison," said Dingell, 81, who has served longer in the House than any of his colleagues and heads one of the chamber's most powerful committees.
Widely known for protecting the automakers who are so prominent in his state, the Michigan Democrat first raised the tax ideas this summer. Some people immediately suggested he was offering proposals he knows won't pass to sidestep other issues such as automobile fuel economy increases.
Dingell rejects such criticism and said he wants to trigger "an intelligent discussion of the whole question."
Many economists have long maintained that a carbon tax is a more-efficient, less-bureaucratic way to reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide than a cap-and-trade system, which could be difficult to administer.
A carbon tax would impact everything from the cost of electricity to winter heating and add to the cost of gasoline and other motor fuels. But economists say a cap on carbon also would raise these costs as burning fossil fuels becomes more expensive.
Such tax proposals have gained little traction.
Rep. Pete Starke, D-Calif., has been trying unsuccessfully to get a carbon tax for 16 years. In the early 1990s the House passed a modest "BTU" tax on the heat content of fuels, only to have it die in the Senate. Dingell acknowledged that there are still people who blame the Democrats' loss of Congress in 1994 on the ill-fated tax.
The federal 18.4-cent gasoline tax also has been a subject of discussion, but not about increasing it. As gasoline prices soared above $3 a gallon last year a chorus of lawmakers called for suspending the tax.
----------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
It's coming people... be prepared. when you read that historic homes and farmhouses will be exempt from the taxes keep in mind that a majority of these lawmakers live in HISTORIC HOMES AND OWN FARMHOUSES. Isn't that SHOCKING!!!! The tax would help POOR people pay energy bills. OH PLEEEAAASSEEEE!!!!! Another entitlement program is just what we need. UGH!!!!!
Plan Uses Taxes to Fight Climate Change
By H. JOSEF HEBERT
The Associated Press
Wednesday, September 26, 2007; 7:34 PM
WASHINGTON -- Dealing with global warming will be painful, says one of the most powerful Democrats in Congress. To back up his claim he is proposing a recipe many people won't like _ a 50-cent gasoline tax, a carbon tax and scaling back tax breaks for some home owners.
"I'm trying to have everybody understand that this is going to cost and that it's going to have a measure of pain that you're not going to like," Rep. John Dingell, who is marking his 52nd year in Congress, said Wednesday in an interview with The Associated Press.
Dingell will offer a "discussion draft" outlining his tax proposals on Thursday, the same day that President Bush holds a two-day conference to discuss voluntary efforts to combat climate change.
But Dingell, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee that will craft climate legislation, is making it clear that he believes tackling global warming will require a lot more if it is to be taken seriously.
"This is going to cause pain," he said, adding that he wants to make certain "the pain is shared in a way that is fair, proper, acceptable and accomplishes the basic purpose" of reducing greenhouse gases, mainly carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels.
Dingell said he's not sure what the final climate package will include when the House takes it up for a vote. The taxes measures he's proposing, in fact, will be taken up by another House committee. And the Senate is considering a market-based system that would set an economy-wide ceiling on the amount of carbon dioxide that would be allowed to be released.
Dingell says he hasn't rule out such a so-called "cap-and-trade" system, either, but that at least for now he wants to float what he believes is a better idea. He will propose for discussion:
_A 50-cent-a-gallon tax on gasoline and jet fuel, phased in over five years, on top of existing taxes.
_A tax on carbon, at $50 a ton, released from burning coal, petroleum or natural gas.
_Phaseout of the interest tax deduction on home mortgages for homes over 3,000 square feet. Owners would keep most of the deduction for homes at the lower end of the scale, but it would be eliminated entirely for homes of 4,200 feet or more.
He estimates that would affect 10 percent of homeowners. He says "it's only fair" to tax those who buy large suburban houses and create urban sprawl. Historic and farm houses would be exempted.
Some of the revenue would be used to reduce payroll taxes, but most would go elsewhere including for highway construction, mass transit, paying for Social Security and health programs and to help the poor pay energy bills.
In the interview Wednesday, Dingell acknowledged he's tackling some of the most sacred of political cows. He's not sure if they will end up in the climate legislation, but he wants to open them for discussion.
"All my friends tell me you can't do this, it's going to be political poison," said Dingell, 81, who has served longer in the House than any of his colleagues and heads one of the chamber's most powerful committees.
Widely known for protecting the automakers who are so prominent in his state, the Michigan Democrat first raised the tax ideas this summer. Some people immediately suggested he was offering proposals he knows won't pass to sidestep other issues such as automobile fuel economy increases.
Dingell rejects such criticism and said he wants to trigger "an intelligent discussion of the whole question."
Many economists have long maintained that a carbon tax is a more-efficient, less-bureaucratic way to reduce the emissions of carbon dioxide than a cap-and-trade system, which could be difficult to administer.
A carbon tax would impact everything from the cost of electricity to winter heating and add to the cost of gasoline and other motor fuels. But economists say a cap on carbon also would raise these costs as burning fossil fuels becomes more expensive.
Such tax proposals have gained little traction.
Rep. Pete Starke, D-Calif., has been trying unsuccessfully to get a carbon tax for 16 years. In the early 1990s the House passed a modest "BTU" tax on the heat content of fuels, only to have it die in the Senate. Dingell acknowledged that there are still people who blame the Democrats' loss of Congress in 1994 on the ill-fated tax.
The federal 18.4-cent gasoline tax also has been a subject of discussion, but not about increasing it. As gasoline prices soared above $3 a gallon last year a chorus of lawmakers called for suspending the tax.
----------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
It's coming people... be prepared. when you read that historic homes and farmhouses will be exempt from the taxes keep in mind that a majority of these lawmakers live in HISTORIC HOMES AND OWN FARMHOUSES. Isn't that SHOCKING!!!! The tax would help POOR people pay energy bills. OH PLEEEAAASSEEEE!!!!! Another entitlement program is just what we need. UGH!!!!!
The CO2 myth
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57822
The CO2 myth
Walter E. Williams - A Minority View
Posted: September 26, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Despite increasing evidence that man-made CO2 is not a significant greenhouse gas and contributor to climate change, politicians and others who wish to control our lives must maintain that it is.
According to the Detroit Free Press, Rep. John Dingell wants a 50-cents-a-gallon tax on gasoline. We've heard such calls before, but there's a new twist. Dingell also wants to eliminate the mortgage tax deduction on what he calls "McMansions," homes that are 3,000 square feet and larger. That's because larger homes use more energy.
One might wonder about Dingell's magnanimity in increasing taxes for only homes 3,000 feet or larger. The average U.S. home is around 2,300 square feet, compared with Europe's average of 1,000 square feet. So why doesn't Dingell call for disallowing mortgage deductions on houses more than 1,000 square feet? The reason is there would be too much political resistance, since more Americans own homes under 3,000 square feet than over 3,000. The full agenda is to start out with 3,000 square feet and later lower it in increments.
Our buying into global warming hysteria will allow politicians to do just about anything, upon which they can muster a majority vote, in the name of fighting climate change as a means to raise taxes.
In addition to excuses to raise taxes, congressmen are using climate change hysteria to funnel money into their districts. Rep. David L. Hobson, R-Ohio, secured $500,000 for a geothermal demonstration project. Rep. Adam B. Schiff, D-Calif., got $500,000 for a fuel-cell project by Superprotonic, a Pasadena company started by Caltech scientists. Money for similar boondoggles is being called for by members of both parties.
There are many ways to reduce CO2 emissions, and being 71 years of age I know many of them. Al Gore might even consider me carbon neutral and possibly having carbon credits because my carbon offsets were made in advance. For example, for the first 15 years of my life, I didn't use energy-consuming refrigerators; we had an icebox. For two decades, I listened to radio instead of watching television and walked or used public transportation to most places. And for more than half my life, I didn't use energy-consuming things such as computers, clothes dryers, air conditioning and microwave ovens. Of course, my standard of living was much lower.
The bottom line is serious efforts to reduce CO2 will lead to lower living standards through higher costs of living. And it will be all for naught because there is little or no relationship between man-made CO2 emissions and climate change.
There's an excellent booklet available from the National Center for Policy Analysis titled "A Global Warming Primer." Some of its highlights are:
"Over long periods of time, there is no close relationship between CO2 levels and temperature."
"Humans contribute approximately 3.4 percent of annual CO2 levels" compared to 96.6 percent by nature.
"There was an explosion of life forms 550 million years ago (Cambrian Period) when CO2 levels were 18 times higher than today. During the Jurassic Period, when dinosaurs roamed the Earth, CO2 levels were as much as nine times higher than today."
What about public school teachers frightening little children with tales of cute polar bears dying because of global warming? The primer says, "Polar bear numbers increased dramatically from around 5,000 in 1950 to as many as 25,000 today, higher than any time in the 20th century." The primer gives detailed sources for all of its findings, and it supplies us with information we can use to stop politicians and their environmental extremists from doing a rope-a-dope on us.
------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
RIGHT ON THE MONEY.... read the facts for yourself and then decide. Hey I'm all for trying to live a cleaner life with less pollution, but to suggest that my CO2 levels are causing a climate shift is simply ignorant.
Law Versus Mob Rule - JENA 6
http://www.creators.com/opinion/thomas-sowell.html
Law Versus Mob Rule
Thomas Sowell
It is painful — and dangerous — how little we learn from history, even when it is recent history.
Just a year ago, "rape" charges spread lynch-mob hysteria on the campus of Duke University and in much of the liberal media, while professional race hustlers descended on the town of Durham, North Carolina, and mindless tribalism was stirred up by extremists in the local black community.
This year, we have all learned what a total fraud that case was, from beginning to end. Yet now we see a similar outburst of mindless tribalism and another attempt at mob rule, promoted by such veterans of last year's hysteria as Jesse Jackson.
This time the scene is in Jena, Louisiana. The issue is the prosecution of a black high school student accused of stomping on an unconscious white student — and the lack of criminal prosecution of white students who hung a noose on a tree, who were disciplined by the school.
Liberals' skills at moral equivalence have been so finely honed during the long years of the Cold War that they have turned this into a case of "unequal treatment," based on race — as if putting a noose on a tree is equivalent to stomping somebody who is unconscious.
The black student was found guilty but the verdict was overturned on appeal — not on grounds that he was not guilty, but on grounds that the appellate court did not think he should have been tried as an adult.
The usual legal procedure would be to try the student again, but this time not as an adult. However, the usual legal procedures are not good enough for those who have once again seized the opportunity to hype race — and to hell with questions of guilt or innocence or legal procedures.
The immediate demand of the mobs that have been mobilized around the country to descend on the small town of Jena is that the young man found guilty of a serious crime of violence should be free on bail pending a second trial.
The legal question is whether letting someone accused of such a crime go free on bail is likely to mean that he will not be around long enough for a second trial.
But no one is seriously debating that.
Racial hype has replaced all rational discussion. Moreover, the Jena episode has shown that two can play the racial hype game. Neo-Nazis have published the names and home addresses of all the young blacks involved in the school incident.
The slogan "No justice, no peace" has been used to justify settling legal issues in the streets, instead of in courts of law.
Neo-Nazis have now helped demonstrate what a dangerous slogan that is, since different people have opposite ideas of what "justice" is in a given situation.
Long after the imported demonstrators have left, and the national media have lost interest, the families of the black youngsters involved in the school altercation will have to live with the knowledge that their privacy and security have both been lost in a racially polarized community, with vengeful elements.
The last thing the South needs is a return to lynch-mob justice, whatever the color of whoever is promoting it.
Back in the 1950s, when the federal courts began striking down the Jim Crow laws in the South, one of the rising demands across the country was that the discriminators and segregationists obey "the law of the land."
But, somewhere along the way, the idea also arose and spread that not everybody was supposed to obey "the law of the land."
Violations of law by people with approved victim status like minorities, or self-righteous crusaders like environmentalists, were to be met with minimal resistance — if any resistance at all — and any punishment of them beyond a wrist-slap was "over-reacting."
College campuses became bastions of the new and sanctified mob rule, provided that the mobs are from the list of groups approved as politically correct. Otherwise, even an injudicious remark could bring swift and certain punishment under "speech codes."
The politics of condoned law-breaking is part of the moral dry rot of our times. So is settling issues in the streets on the basis of race, instead of in courts on the basis of law.
To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com. Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His Web site is www.tsowell.com.
COPYRIGHT 2007 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
Ex-military to be denied gun ownership
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57847
Ex-military to be denied gun ownership
2nd Amendment advocates warn it poses clear constitutional threat--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
The Gun Owners of America is launching an urgent campaign encouraging people to call their U.S. senators and ask them to oppose a bill that could be described as "disarmament by diagnosis." It would allow a person's right to own a gun in the United States to be permanently removed, under a wide range of circumstances.
"You'd think that when rabid, anti-gun legislators like Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy join together to pass anti-gun legislation, it would raise a few red flags. But these two New York Democrats are currently planning to roll over gun owners with H.R. 2640 – legislation which would bar you from owning guns if: You are a battle-scarred veteran suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; or as a kid, you were diagnosed with ADHD," the alert says.
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., announcing a provision to allow doctors to ban people from owning guns
Gun Owners Executive Director Larry Pratt told WND that those are just two of the circumstances that legitimately could be used under the pending proposal to permanently remove an individual's right to own a weapon in the United States.
Someone in counseling during a bitter divorce, a child who at one point gets into a scrape on a school yard and is put on Ritalin, or even someone given "counseling" for issues such as depression during recovery from an accident or work-related injury are some other situations that could trigger such "disarmament by diagnosis," he said.
The plan, described in Congress as an expansion of the Brady Gun Bill that requires background checks for potential firearms purchasers, would require people who have such a diagnosis in their health record to be permanently banned from owning a gun.
As WND reported earlier, H.R. 2640 was launched by McCarthy in the wake of the April shooting tragedy at Virginia Tech, when a gunman shot and killed more than 30 people, then killed himself. The gunman previously had been ordered by a court to have a psychiatric evaluation and should have been prevented from purchasing a gun under existing laws, but apparently the gun seller didn't know that.
The plan would provide access to a multitude of medical records repositories for authorities to compile lists of people who have had such a diagnosis.
Pratt told WND that Schumer right now is pushing hard for a consent "agreement" in the Senate so that the plan could be approved without further discussion and sent to President Bush.
"This agreement is extremely diabolical, as it would eliminate the ability of pro-gun senators to offer amendments which would clean up the legislation … and would grease the skids for immediate passage!," the alert said.
The concerns expressed by Pratt, whose organization represents more than 300,000 Americans, were echoed by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, a Texas congressman now seeking the GOP nomination for president.
"In my opinion, H.R. 2640 is a flagrantly unconstitutional expansion of restriction on the exercise of the right to bear arms protected under the Second Amendment," he said. "H.R. 2640 also seriously undermines the privacy rights of all Americans – gun owners and non-gun owners alike – by creating and expanding massive federal government databases, including medical and other private records of every American."
He noted that the new information that would be submitted to a federal database would come from medical, psychological and drug treatment records that traditionally have been considered protected from disclosure under the physician-patient relationship.
"We should not trick ourselves into believing that we can pick and choose which part of the Bill of Rights we support," he said.
The National Rifle Association has not expressed such a high level of concern yet. Wayne LaPierre, the group's executive vice president, has said that the Virginia Tech killer absolutely should have been barred from buying a gun under federal laws that already exist.
He said such records as a 2005 court order directing the gunman to get a psychiatric evaluation should be in an FBI database used for those background checks.
"Our position on this is crystal clear: If you are adjudicated by a court to be mentally defective, suicidal, a danger to yourself or to others, you should be prohibited from buying a firearm," he has said.
The GOA has no difficulty with someone being formally "adjudicated" by a court. But Mike Hammond, the organization's legislative counsel, said the issue is that the expansion allows others to make such a decision.
It opens those who can make that determination – on someone else's competency – to a "court, board, commission, or other lawful authority."
That, he concluded in an analysis, could be a school psychologist, a psychiatrist commissioned by Medicare to evaluate seniors for Alzheimer's, a Veteran's Administration psychiatrist, or a psychologist who for any reason involuntarily commits a patient "with no due process at all."
The GOA cited a recent Pennsylvania case to illustrate the dangers that would be presented.
It was an apparent "offhanded, tongue-in-cheek remark" made by Horatio Miller that got the case started. He allegedly said it could be "worse than Virginia Tech" if someone broke into his car, because of the guns there.
"It is not clear whether he was making a threat against a person who might burglarize his car, or if he was simply saying that the bad guy could do a lot of damage because of the guns he would find there," the GOA said.
Miller, with no criminal record and the holder of a concealed carry permit who had passed rigorous background checks, was ordered never to own or possess a gun again.
"I contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked. And I asked police to commit him under Section 302 of the mental health procedures act and that was done. He is now ineligible to possess firearms [for life] because he was committed involuntarily," the district attorney reported.
"The comment Miller made was certainly not the smartest thing to say," said the GOA. "But realize, we don't incarcerate people for making stupid statements in this country – at least not yet."
The plan also would provide more than a billion dollars to computerize mental-health and medical records for installation in the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
The Military Order of the Purple Heart, representing those among the bravest of the nation's military who have been injured in defense of their nation, said the plan "would statutorily impose a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans."
"The Pennsylvania case shows how all gun owners could be threatened by H.R. 2640," said the GAO. "After all, did you ever tell anyone that the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights because the Founders (such as James Madison) wanted the people to be able to overturn a tyrannical American government?
"Or, while you were watching the nightly news – and getting a detailed account of all the crime in your area – did you ever make a statement such as, 'If someone were to break through my door, I'd blow him away!'"
The conclusion? "Those kinds of statements will certainly make anti-gun nuts think you're a potential danger to yourself or others. So if you make the local district attorney or police officer nervous, how difficult would it be for him to get a psychiatrist (most of whom are very left-wing) to say that you are a danger to yourself and to others?" the GOA said.
Pratt noted that the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives already had instituted regulations that define a danger perceived by someone else as "any danger."
Pratt told WND the movement through Congress also is as alarming as the substance of the bill. He said the House voted at 8 in the morning to approve the bill, but left no recorded vote. Now a supporter is trying to exempt the plan from ordinary discussion and debate in the Senate.
"We have a letter from a retired judge in Wyoming, talking about some friends of his. They see a counselor occasionally [because of their service in Vietnam.] They've all got concealed carry permits. They're going to be toast," he said.
---------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
THE RIGHT TO PROTECT YOURSELF, YOUR FAMILY, AND YOUR PROPRTY is one the of the important rights we have. With more and more people diagnosed with ADD or ADHD (both in my opinion are in fact over diagnosed as an easy out for people who don't want to work with difficult children) who will ever hold a gun in the future and protect America. As far as war vets go.... IF THEY FOUGHT AND PROTECTED MY FREEDOMS they are better than any congressman in D.C.
Ex-military to be denied gun ownership
2nd Amendment advocates warn it poses clear constitutional threat--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 27, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
The Gun Owners of America is launching an urgent campaign encouraging people to call their U.S. senators and ask them to oppose a bill that could be described as "disarmament by diagnosis." It would allow a person's right to own a gun in the United States to be permanently removed, under a wide range of circumstances.
"You'd think that when rabid, anti-gun legislators like Sen. Charles Schumer and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy join together to pass anti-gun legislation, it would raise a few red flags. But these two New York Democrats are currently planning to roll over gun owners with H.R. 2640 – legislation which would bar you from owning guns if: You are a battle-scarred veteran suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder; or as a kid, you were diagnosed with ADHD," the alert says.
Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y., announcing a provision to allow doctors to ban people from owning guns
Gun Owners Executive Director Larry Pratt told WND that those are just two of the circumstances that legitimately could be used under the pending proposal to permanently remove an individual's right to own a weapon in the United States.
Someone in counseling during a bitter divorce, a child who at one point gets into a scrape on a school yard and is put on Ritalin, or even someone given "counseling" for issues such as depression during recovery from an accident or work-related injury are some other situations that could trigger such "disarmament by diagnosis," he said.
The plan, described in Congress as an expansion of the Brady Gun Bill that requires background checks for potential firearms purchasers, would require people who have such a diagnosis in their health record to be permanently banned from owning a gun.
As WND reported earlier, H.R. 2640 was launched by McCarthy in the wake of the April shooting tragedy at Virginia Tech, when a gunman shot and killed more than 30 people, then killed himself. The gunman previously had been ordered by a court to have a psychiatric evaluation and should have been prevented from purchasing a gun under existing laws, but apparently the gun seller didn't know that.
The plan would provide access to a multitude of medical records repositories for authorities to compile lists of people who have had such a diagnosis.
Pratt told WND that Schumer right now is pushing hard for a consent "agreement" in the Senate so that the plan could be approved without further discussion and sent to President Bush.
"This agreement is extremely diabolical, as it would eliminate the ability of pro-gun senators to offer amendments which would clean up the legislation … and would grease the skids for immediate passage!," the alert said.
The concerns expressed by Pratt, whose organization represents more than 300,000 Americans, were echoed by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, a Texas congressman now seeking the GOP nomination for president.
"In my opinion, H.R. 2640 is a flagrantly unconstitutional expansion of restriction on the exercise of the right to bear arms protected under the Second Amendment," he said. "H.R. 2640 also seriously undermines the privacy rights of all Americans – gun owners and non-gun owners alike – by creating and expanding massive federal government databases, including medical and other private records of every American."
He noted that the new information that would be submitted to a federal database would come from medical, psychological and drug treatment records that traditionally have been considered protected from disclosure under the physician-patient relationship.
"We should not trick ourselves into believing that we can pick and choose which part of the Bill of Rights we support," he said.
The National Rifle Association has not expressed such a high level of concern yet. Wayne LaPierre, the group's executive vice president, has said that the Virginia Tech killer absolutely should have been barred from buying a gun under federal laws that already exist.
He said such records as a 2005 court order directing the gunman to get a psychiatric evaluation should be in an FBI database used for those background checks.
"Our position on this is crystal clear: If you are adjudicated by a court to be mentally defective, suicidal, a danger to yourself or to others, you should be prohibited from buying a firearm," he has said.
The GOA has no difficulty with someone being formally "adjudicated" by a court. But Mike Hammond, the organization's legislative counsel, said the issue is that the expansion allows others to make such a decision.
It opens those who can make that determination – on someone else's competency – to a "court, board, commission, or other lawful authority."
That, he concluded in an analysis, could be a school psychologist, a psychiatrist commissioned by Medicare to evaluate seniors for Alzheimer's, a Veteran's Administration psychiatrist, or a psychologist who for any reason involuntarily commits a patient "with no due process at all."
The GOA cited a recent Pennsylvania case to illustrate the dangers that would be presented.
It was an apparent "offhanded, tongue-in-cheek remark" made by Horatio Miller that got the case started. He allegedly said it could be "worse than Virginia Tech" if someone broke into his car, because of the guns there.
"It is not clear whether he was making a threat against a person who might burglarize his car, or if he was simply saying that the bad guy could do a lot of damage because of the guns he would find there," the GOA said.
Miller, with no criminal record and the holder of a concealed carry permit who had passed rigorous background checks, was ordered never to own or possess a gun again.
"I contacted the sheriff and had his license to carry a firearm revoked. And I asked police to commit him under Section 302 of the mental health procedures act and that was done. He is now ineligible to possess firearms [for life] because he was committed involuntarily," the district attorney reported.
"The comment Miller made was certainly not the smartest thing to say," said the GOA. "But realize, we don't incarcerate people for making stupid statements in this country – at least not yet."
The plan also would provide more than a billion dollars to computerize mental-health and medical records for installation in the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System.
The Military Order of the Purple Heart, representing those among the bravest of the nation's military who have been injured in defense of their nation, said the plan "would statutorily impose a lifetime gun ban on battle-scarred veterans."
"The Pennsylvania case shows how all gun owners could be threatened by H.R. 2640," said the GAO. "After all, did you ever tell anyone that the Second Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights because the Founders (such as James Madison) wanted the people to be able to overturn a tyrannical American government?
"Or, while you were watching the nightly news – and getting a detailed account of all the crime in your area – did you ever make a statement such as, 'If someone were to break through my door, I'd blow him away!'"
The conclusion? "Those kinds of statements will certainly make anti-gun nuts think you're a potential danger to yourself or others. So if you make the local district attorney or police officer nervous, how difficult would it be for him to get a psychiatrist (most of whom are very left-wing) to say that you are a danger to yourself and to others?" the GOA said.
Pratt noted that the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives already had instituted regulations that define a danger perceived by someone else as "any danger."
Pratt told WND the movement through Congress also is as alarming as the substance of the bill. He said the House voted at 8 in the morning to approve the bill, but left no recorded vote. Now a supporter is trying to exempt the plan from ordinary discussion and debate in the Senate.
"We have a letter from a retired judge in Wyoming, talking about some friends of his. They see a counselor occasionally [because of their service in Vietnam.] They've all got concealed carry permits. They're going to be toast," he said.
---------------------------------------------
MY COMMENTS:
THE RIGHT TO PROTECT YOURSELF, YOUR FAMILY, AND YOUR PROPRTY is one the of the important rights we have. With more and more people diagnosed with ADD or ADHD (both in my opinion are in fact over diagnosed as an easy out for people who don't want to work with difficult children) who will ever hold a gun in the future and protect America. As far as war vets go.... IF THEY FOUGHT AND PROTECTED MY FREEDOMS they are better than any congressman in D.C.
Sarkozy calls for UN-led 'new world order'
http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/113706.html
Sarkozy calls for UN-led 'new world order'
Posted : Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:51:09 GMT
Author : DPA
New York - The United Nations should avail itself as an instrument for a "new world order of the 21st century," French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Tuesday in his first address to the General Assembly. Sarkozy, who won the presidency this year on a strong reform platform to modernize France, urged the world body to embark on programmes ranging from equal wealth distribution to fighting corruption in his speech full of references to France's past revolutionary ideals.
"In the name of France, I call upon all states to join ranks in order to found the new world order of the 21st century on the notion that the common goods that belong to all of humankind must be the common responsibility for us all," he told the General Assembly.
The UN should ensure access for all human beings to vital resources, such as water, energy, food, medication and knowledge, he said. He called for "more morality" in "financial capitalism" and a fairer distribution of profits, earnings in commodities, raw materials and new technologies.
"There must be a change of mindset and behaviour," Sarkozy said in a long list of demands to the international community.
Known for his admiration of the United States and its culture, Sarkozy said France will remain loyal to its friends and the values it shares with them.
But he warned that loyalty should not be equated with submission, a reference to Paris' disagreement with the US-led war in Iraq.
"What I want to say to the world is that France, faithful to its friends, stands ready to talk to all people, on every continent," he said.
------------------------------------------------
MY NOTES:
WOW, Where to begin.... Here I thought I liked the new president of France, but now I can see he's just another SOCIALIST! I told you the green wave is here people. They will start an enviromental tax! Have fun paying for breathing the air, and driving your car. Yup, the phrase "equal distribution" scares the hell out of me. If you read the Coomunist Manifesto it perfectly describes what today's democrats and a few republicans believe. Anytime you hear the words - equal distribution, sustainable development/growth, or new world order - RUN FOR THE HILLS!
Sarkozy calls for UN-led 'new world order'
Posted : Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:51:09 GMT
Author : DPA
New York - The United Nations should avail itself as an instrument for a "new world order of the 21st century," French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Tuesday in his first address to the General Assembly. Sarkozy, who won the presidency this year on a strong reform platform to modernize France, urged the world body to embark on programmes ranging from equal wealth distribution to fighting corruption in his speech full of references to France's past revolutionary ideals.
"In the name of France, I call upon all states to join ranks in order to found the new world order of the 21st century on the notion that the common goods that belong to all of humankind must be the common responsibility for us all," he told the General Assembly.
The UN should ensure access for all human beings to vital resources, such as water, energy, food, medication and knowledge, he said. He called for "more morality" in "financial capitalism" and a fairer distribution of profits, earnings in commodities, raw materials and new technologies.
"There must be a change of mindset and behaviour," Sarkozy said in a long list of demands to the international community.
Known for his admiration of the United States and its culture, Sarkozy said France will remain loyal to its friends and the values it shares with them.
But he warned that loyalty should not be equated with submission, a reference to Paris' disagreement with the US-led war in Iraq.
"What I want to say to the world is that France, faithful to its friends, stands ready to talk to all people, on every continent," he said.
------------------------------------------------
MY NOTES:
WOW, Where to begin.... Here I thought I liked the new president of France, but now I can see he's just another SOCIALIST! I told you the green wave is here people. They will start an enviromental tax! Have fun paying for breathing the air, and driving your car. Yup, the phrase "equal distribution" scares the hell out of me. If you read the Coomunist Manifesto it perfectly describes what today's democrats and a few republicans believe. Anytime you hear the words - equal distribution, sustainable development/growth, or new world order - RUN FOR THE HILLS!
British history 'needs rewrite'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7012698.stm
British history 'needs rewrite'
By Brian Wheeler
Political reporter, BBC News, at the Labour conference
British history should be rewritten to make it "more inclusive", says Trevor Phillips, the head of the new human rights and equality commission.
He said Muslims were also part of the national story and "sometimes we have to go back into the tapestry and insert some threads that were lost".
He quoted the example of the Spanish Armada, which was held up by the Turks at the request of Queen Elizabeth I.
"It was the Turks who saved us," Mr Phillips told a Labour fringe meeting.
Let's use our heritage to rewrite that story so it is truly inclusive... so we have an identity which binds us in the stormy times we are going to have in the next century
Mr Phillips said he had also been persuaded of the need for a written constitution, saying the UK needed to be "more explicit in our understanding about how we treat each other".
He said population changes and immigration were happening at unprecedented rate and there was "no going back".
So it was no longer enough to assume people would inherit the values which bound the country together.
Speaking at an event organised by The Smith Institute, the Heritage Lottery Fund and the Young Foundation, he said it was important that new arrivals learned English.
Must be 'native' and 'right for us'
But he also stressed the importance of celebrating Britain's "human rights culture" and said the government had to be more specific about what it meant to be British - rather than simply stressing values such as "freedom" which were universal.
"We have to have a more explicit set of understandings which we can all share about how we treat each other and we talk to each other and they have to be based on real values.
"I think the prime minister is right to talk about values but I think what is important is not the abstract values. Freedom is shared by all sorts of people."
If there was a written constitution it would have to be "an expression which is native and right for us".
He also stressed the importance of a national story in forging a shared sense of identity.
"I think we have to rewrite, redevelop, our national story so that it is inclusive.
"And what I mean by that in practice is this: not that we have to re-write what we are but sometimes we have to go back into the tapestry and insert some threads that were lost."
'Stormy times'
He said the abolition of the slave trade, for example, could be retold as being part of the English radical tradition.
"Part of the job of heritage is to cognitize - give physical existence - to that national story.
Let's rewrite that story, let's use our heritage to rewrite that story so it is truly inclusive
"And if there is a practical thing, I would say it is that we need to revisit some parts of that national heritage. to rewrite some parts of that national story to tell the whole story.
"When we talk about the Armada it's only now that we are beginning to realise that part of it is Muslims," Mr Phillips told the meeting.
"It was the Turks who saved us, because they held up Armada at the request of Elizabeth I.
"Now let's rewrite that story, let's use our heritage to rewrite that story so it is truly inclusive.
"That's the reason for this so we have an identity which brings us together, which binds us in the stormy times that we are going to have in the next century."
______________________________________
MY NOTES:
OH PU-LEASEEEE! Just another attempt to appease a minority.
British history 'needs rewrite'
By Brian Wheeler
Political reporter, BBC News, at the Labour conference
British history should be rewritten to make it "more inclusive", says Trevor Phillips, the head of the new human rights and equality commission.
He said Muslims were also part of the national story and "sometimes we have to go back into the tapestry and insert some threads that were lost".
He quoted the example of the Spanish Armada, which was held up by the Turks at the request of Queen Elizabeth I.
"It was the Turks who saved us," Mr Phillips told a Labour fringe meeting.
Let's use our heritage to rewrite that story so it is truly inclusive... so we have an identity which binds us in the stormy times we are going to have in the next century
Mr Phillips said he had also been persuaded of the need for a written constitution, saying the UK needed to be "more explicit in our understanding about how we treat each other".
He said population changes and immigration were happening at unprecedented rate and there was "no going back".
So it was no longer enough to assume people would inherit the values which bound the country together.
Speaking at an event organised by The Smith Institute, the Heritage Lottery Fund and the Young Foundation, he said it was important that new arrivals learned English.
Must be 'native' and 'right for us'
But he also stressed the importance of celebrating Britain's "human rights culture" and said the government had to be more specific about what it meant to be British - rather than simply stressing values such as "freedom" which were universal.
"We have to have a more explicit set of understandings which we can all share about how we treat each other and we talk to each other and they have to be based on real values.
"I think the prime minister is right to talk about values but I think what is important is not the abstract values. Freedom is shared by all sorts of people."
If there was a written constitution it would have to be "an expression which is native and right for us".
He also stressed the importance of a national story in forging a shared sense of identity.
"I think we have to rewrite, redevelop, our national story so that it is inclusive.
"And what I mean by that in practice is this: not that we have to re-write what we are but sometimes we have to go back into the tapestry and insert some threads that were lost."
'Stormy times'
He said the abolition of the slave trade, for example, could be retold as being part of the English radical tradition.
"Part of the job of heritage is to cognitize - give physical existence - to that national story.
Let's rewrite that story, let's use our heritage to rewrite that story so it is truly inclusive
"And if there is a practical thing, I would say it is that we need to revisit some parts of that national heritage. to rewrite some parts of that national story to tell the whole story.
"When we talk about the Armada it's only now that we are beginning to realise that part of it is Muslims," Mr Phillips told the meeting.
"It was the Turks who saved us, because they held up Armada at the request of Elizabeth I.
"Now let's rewrite that story, let's use our heritage to rewrite that story so it is truly inclusive.
"That's the reason for this so we have an identity which brings us together, which binds us in the stormy times that we are going to have in the next century."
______________________________________
MY NOTES:
OH PU-LEASEEEE! Just another attempt to appease a minority.
Hispanic immigrants sue U.S. city after crackdown
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070927/us_nm/usa_immigration_lawsuit_dc_2
Hispanic immigrants sue U.S. city after crackdown
By Av Harris
Wed Sep 26, 8:47 PM ET
DANBURY, Connecticut (Reuters) - Ten Hispanic immigrants filed a lawsuit on Wednesday against a Connecticut city, its mayor and police chief, and federal agents who led a crackdown on illegal immigration last year.
The suit filed in U.S. District Court in New Haven, Connecticut, claims the arrests violated the civil rights of nine workers and a 10th man who was stopped at a traffic light, including their right to due legal process, free speech and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, according to court documents.
It is the latest legal challenge to crackdowns on illegal immigrants, as localities nationwide grapple with how to handle their status.
The lawsuit claims undercover police in Danbury, Connecticut, lured the workers into a van by posing as contractors looking for day laborers.
"He offered us work and we took it," plaintiff Juan Barrera told a news conference, referring to an undercover police officer. "We didn't know why, but they immediately arrested us and put us in handcuffs. We didn't know what was going on.
"They treated me like a violent criminal and all I was trying to do was find work," Barrera added.
After their 2006 arrest in a sting set up by local and federal authorities, the men were handed over to federal agents, held without charge for days or weeks, then transported to detention centers before being released on bond, court documents said.
The plaintiffs, represented by Yale University law students, claim the U.S. Constitution protects the civil rights of all people in the United States. The attorneys would not discuss their clients' immigration status or their countries of origin.
Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton vowed to defend the city.
Boughton, a Republican, is a well-known crusader against illegal immigration. Two years ago, he wanted Connecticut State Police find illegal workers and turn them over to the U.S. immigration agency for deportation. Connecticut Gov. Jodi Rell rejected the request.
-----------------------------------------
MY NOTES:
These people are criminals and deserve to be punished by law. They broke the law coming here illegally (thus ILLEGAL!). Maybe they were just trying to work, but you know what?!?! It's not a good enough excuse. Most people seem to think all immigrants are good, and hard-working. Not true. Some of them are, but the vast majority come to suck off the American taxpayers, take advantahe of our healthcare system, get welfare handouts, and educate their swarms of children. I like IMMIGRATION and LEGAL immigrants, don't get me wrong. HOWEVER, I DETEST it when the will of the American people no longer matters and the will of MEXICO is the only thing that matters.
Hispanic immigrants sue U.S. city after crackdown
By Av Harris
Wed Sep 26, 8:47 PM ET
DANBURY, Connecticut (Reuters) - Ten Hispanic immigrants filed a lawsuit on Wednesday against a Connecticut city, its mayor and police chief, and federal agents who led a crackdown on illegal immigration last year.
The suit filed in U.S. District Court in New Haven, Connecticut, claims the arrests violated the civil rights of nine workers and a 10th man who was stopped at a traffic light, including their right to due legal process, free speech and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures, according to court documents.
It is the latest legal challenge to crackdowns on illegal immigrants, as localities nationwide grapple with how to handle their status.
The lawsuit claims undercover police in Danbury, Connecticut, lured the workers into a van by posing as contractors looking for day laborers.
"He offered us work and we took it," plaintiff Juan Barrera told a news conference, referring to an undercover police officer. "We didn't know why, but they immediately arrested us and put us in handcuffs. We didn't know what was going on.
"They treated me like a violent criminal and all I was trying to do was find work," Barrera added.
After their 2006 arrest in a sting set up by local and federal authorities, the men were handed over to federal agents, held without charge for days or weeks, then transported to detention centers before being released on bond, court documents said.
The plaintiffs, represented by Yale University law students, claim the U.S. Constitution protects the civil rights of all people in the United States. The attorneys would not discuss their clients' immigration status or their countries of origin.
Danbury Mayor Mark Boughton vowed to defend the city.
Boughton, a Republican, is a well-known crusader against illegal immigration. Two years ago, he wanted Connecticut State Police find illegal workers and turn them over to the U.S. immigration agency for deportation. Connecticut Gov. Jodi Rell rejected the request.
-----------------------------------------
MY NOTES:
These people are criminals and deserve to be punished by law. They broke the law coming here illegally (thus ILLEGAL!). Maybe they were just trying to work, but you know what?!?! It's not a good enough excuse. Most people seem to think all immigrants are good, and hard-working. Not true. Some of them are, but the vast majority come to suck off the American taxpayers, take advantahe of our healthcare system, get welfare handouts, and educate their swarms of children. I like IMMIGRATION and LEGAL immigrants, don't get me wrong. HOWEVER, I DETEST it when the will of the American people no longer matters and the will of MEXICO is the only thing that matters.
Vaccines not linked to kids’ neurological ills
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20996847/
Vaccines not linked to kids’ neurological ills
Study: Mercury not connected to problems, but autism risk still unexamined
Updated: 6:34 p.m. CT Sept 26, 2007
LOS ANGELES - A mercury-based preservative once used in many vaccines does not raise the risk of neurological problems in children, concludes a large federal study that researchers say should reassure parents about the safety of shots their kids received a decade or more ago.
However, the study did not examine autism — the developmental disorder that some critics blame on vaccines. A separate study due out in a year will look at that issue, said scientists at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who led the latest analysis and published results in Thursday’s New England Journal of Medicine.
They found no clear link between early exposure to the preservative thimerosal and problems with brain function and behavior in children age 7 to 10. The results are in line with past research that found no connection between vaccines and neurological problems or autism.
Thimerosal (pronounced thih-MEHR’-uh-sawl) has not been used in childhood vaccines since 2001, although it is still in some flu shots. The new findings apply to children immunized before then, or exposed to the preservative through shots their mothers received while pregnant. Thimerosal was put in vaccines to prevent contamination from bacteria.
Some doctors say the CDC study should reassure parents worried about the safety of vaccines.
“It’s good news for families,” said Dr. Michael Goldstein, vice president of the American Academy of Neurology who works in private practice in Salt Lake City. “There’s no evidence that these vaccines have caused injury.”
The study involved 1,047 children who were exposed to varying levels of thimerosal while in the womb or after birth in the 1990s. The children belonged to four health maintenance organizations that are part of a federal project to study the side effects of vaccines. Their mercury exposure was determined through medical and immunization records and interviews with parents.
Are your child's shots up-to-date?
Each child was tested for speech and language skills, motor coordination and intelligence. Parents, teachers and trained specialists also rated stuttering, attention span and tic disorders such as head shaking, eye blinking and neck jerking. A total of 42 neurological problems were analyzed.
On balance, researchers did not find a consistent pattern between increasing thimerosal exposure and the risk of these problems. However, they said one finding merited further study: Boys exposed to higher mercury levels seemed to have more tic problems — a link seen in previous research.
“The doses of mercury that children were exposed to because of immunization doesn’t cause neuropsychological damage,” said Dr. Bruce H. Cohen, a Cleveland Clinic pediatric neurology specialist who had no role in the study.
The CDC study was reviewed by an independent panel of scientists and statisticians who oversaw its design, reviewed results and contributed to writing the report.
The panel included one vaccine opponent — Sallie Bernard, executive director of the consumer group SafeMinds. Although she had a role in planning the study, she asked to be listed as a “dissenting member” because she disagreed with the study’s conclusions.
The research was led by William Thompson, a CDC epidemiologist who once worked for vaccine maker Merck & Co. Four other researchers have received fees from drug companies and one has served as a consultant to a CDC committee on immunization.
The study was not designed to tease out the effects of mercury exposure on autism. Thompson is completing a separate study examining whether thimerosal exposure before or after birth causes autism. The study recruited 1,000 children including 250 with autism. Results are expected next year.
Autism is a major public health concern, with one in 150 American children diagnosed with the disorder characterized by repetitive behaviors and impaired social interaction.
Although past scientific studies have found no link between autism and thimerosal-containing vaccines, the highly charged issue went on trial this summer.
A court in Washington, D.C., heard from an Arizona mother who blamed vaccines on her 12-year-old daughter’s severe autism. The case is being followed by about 5,000 families who filed similar claims to receive compensation from a federal vaccine injury fund. The fund so far has not paid out an autism claim.
_____________________________________________________
MY NOTES:
I'm still holding out for the study on Autism. It should be an interesting read.
Vaccines not linked to kids’ neurological ills
Study: Mercury not connected to problems, but autism risk still unexamined
Updated: 6:34 p.m. CT Sept 26, 2007
LOS ANGELES - A mercury-based preservative once used in many vaccines does not raise the risk of neurological problems in children, concludes a large federal study that researchers say should reassure parents about the safety of shots their kids received a decade or more ago.
However, the study did not examine autism — the developmental disorder that some critics blame on vaccines. A separate study due out in a year will look at that issue, said scientists at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who led the latest analysis and published results in Thursday’s New England Journal of Medicine.
They found no clear link between early exposure to the preservative thimerosal and problems with brain function and behavior in children age 7 to 10. The results are in line with past research that found no connection between vaccines and neurological problems or autism.
Thimerosal (pronounced thih-MEHR’-uh-sawl) has not been used in childhood vaccines since 2001, although it is still in some flu shots. The new findings apply to children immunized before then, or exposed to the preservative through shots their mothers received while pregnant. Thimerosal was put in vaccines to prevent contamination from bacteria.
Some doctors say the CDC study should reassure parents worried about the safety of vaccines.
“It’s good news for families,” said Dr. Michael Goldstein, vice president of the American Academy of Neurology who works in private practice in Salt Lake City. “There’s no evidence that these vaccines have caused injury.”
The study involved 1,047 children who were exposed to varying levels of thimerosal while in the womb or after birth in the 1990s. The children belonged to four health maintenance organizations that are part of a federal project to study the side effects of vaccines. Their mercury exposure was determined through medical and immunization records and interviews with parents.
Are your child's shots up-to-date?
Each child was tested for speech and language skills, motor coordination and intelligence. Parents, teachers and trained specialists also rated stuttering, attention span and tic disorders such as head shaking, eye blinking and neck jerking. A total of 42 neurological problems were analyzed.
On balance, researchers did not find a consistent pattern between increasing thimerosal exposure and the risk of these problems. However, they said one finding merited further study: Boys exposed to higher mercury levels seemed to have more tic problems — a link seen in previous research.
“The doses of mercury that children were exposed to because of immunization doesn’t cause neuropsychological damage,” said Dr. Bruce H. Cohen, a Cleveland Clinic pediatric neurology specialist who had no role in the study.
The CDC study was reviewed by an independent panel of scientists and statisticians who oversaw its design, reviewed results and contributed to writing the report.
The panel included one vaccine opponent — Sallie Bernard, executive director of the consumer group SafeMinds. Although she had a role in planning the study, she asked to be listed as a “dissenting member” because she disagreed with the study’s conclusions.
The research was led by William Thompson, a CDC epidemiologist who once worked for vaccine maker Merck & Co. Four other researchers have received fees from drug companies and one has served as a consultant to a CDC committee on immunization.
The study was not designed to tease out the effects of mercury exposure on autism. Thompson is completing a separate study examining whether thimerosal exposure before or after birth causes autism. The study recruited 1,000 children including 250 with autism. Results are expected next year.
Autism is a major public health concern, with one in 150 American children diagnosed with the disorder characterized by repetitive behaviors and impaired social interaction.
Although past scientific studies have found no link between autism and thimerosal-containing vaccines, the highly charged issue went on trial this summer.
A court in Washington, D.C., heard from an Arizona mother who blamed vaccines on her 12-year-old daughter’s severe autism. The case is being followed by about 5,000 families who filed similar claims to receive compensation from a federal vaccine injury fund. The fund so far has not paid out an autism claim.
_____________________________________________________
MY NOTES:
I'm still holding out for the study on Autism. It should be an interesting read.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Why I am not a Republican
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57812
Posted: September 25, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
In a heated conversation at the Friday banquet of Phyllis Schalfly's Eagle Council meeting in St. Louis last week, Jed Babbin, editor of Human Events, repeated accusations that I am a "black helicopter Internet conspiracy theorist" for arguing that the Bush administration is pursing the North American Union and NAFTA Superhighways through the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.
In response, I observed that Babbin has taken Human Events in the direction of becoming an apologist for the Republican Party, not a critical forum for conservative debate.
What is difficult to understand is that many of the articles I first wrote exploring these subjects were first published last year in Human Events, under the editorial direction of Babbin's predecessor, Robert Bluey.
Beginning in 2006, a year before Babbin was appointed editor, I began exploring the Trans-Texas Corridor and Interstate, which has been called the NAFTA Superhighway since 1998. I began looking into the Security and Prosperity Partnership President Bush declared with Mexico and Canada at the end of the trilateral summit in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005.
Out of these articles I began to see a pattern of North American integration under SPP that developed into the major argument of my current New York Times best-selling book, "The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada."
(Column continues below)
These Human Events articles were widely popular, in some weeks last year constituting as many as two or three of the 10 most read articles published that week on the Human Events website.
Yet, today, Babbin has even removed my name from the list of columnists published on Human Events and I've transitioned to becoming a full-time staff reporter at WND.
Evidently, Babbin's criticism of me represents a repudiation of the editorial standards Human Events established under Bluey, because Robert regularly encouraged me to continue exploring these issues.
Babbin's accusations were even more surprising, coming at a formal dinner where usually everybody is well behaved and respectful, even if only for the duration of the event.
But Babbin's charges are nothing new.
As WND has reported, President Bush at the recent SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec, ridiculed as a "conspiracy theory" the suggestion that the SPP might be aimed at creating a North American Union and promoting NAFTA Superhighways.
This line of criticism has been echoed by several radio talk-show hosts, including movie critic Michael Medved, whose tirades on the subject often seem to degenerate into name-calling irrationality.
I tried to explain to Babbin that moral Christians are not Republican Party apologists by definition.
Moreover, ridiculing us for adhering to our principles is not going to win over our votes in the coming 2008 election.
My conflict with Babbin began months ago, with the first piece I ever submitted to him, back when he first took over from Bluey in February.
That piece explained how the value-added tax functions to make unfair many of our "free trade" agreements. Babbin rejected the piece, saying it was too "wonkish" for him.
The issue of the value-added tax seen as an unfair aspect of U.S. "free trade" agreements was being pressed by the noted conservative activist businessman Roger Milliken of Milliken & Co., and the subject was the focus of a training session conducted by Phyllis Schlafly at Eagle Forum.
The criticism struck me as odd, perhaps because I consider "wonkish" the type of name-calling pejorative I was subjected to by kids on the playground in grade school who called me "four eyes" for wearing glasses.
The value-added tax is an important issue, even if it may appear to some to be technical or requiring some attention to complex economics to fully appreciate. But to call the issue "wonkish" was not the type of constructive criticism a writer expects from an editor, but appeared juvenile at best.
Schlafly subsequently had an article on the value-added tax accepted by Babbin and published on Human Events, making me think that Babbin's criticism of me was always ad hominem related and personal in nature, stemming from some animosity that I fail to comprehend.
My article on the value-added tax was subsequently published by World Net Daily.
As WND reported over the weekend, my speech last Friday at the St. Louis Eagle Council meeting centered on "The Late Great USA" and my argument that President Bush's determination to press a North American integration agenda against the will of the American people could cost the Republican Party the 2008 presidential election and the loss of two-thirds of the seats in the Senate and the House of Representatives.
In that speech, I reminded the Eagle Council audience that Karl Rove was the architect of the 2006 Republican Party electoral debacle as well as the 2004 presidential win.
I cautioned that if President Bush does not quit talking about Mexican guest workers, Mexican trucks and illegal-alien paths to citizenship, the 2006 mid-term election might be just a prelude to the electoral disaster the Republican Party will face in 2008.
At dinner that evening, Babbin chided me to get off these "black helicopter conspiracy themes," or risk electing Hillary Clinton as a consequence.
I took offense at Babbin's continued tendency to insult me rather than argue with me over issues I take seriously. I reflected that personal animosity has no place in serious professional discourse on politics.
The argument became even more heated when I pointed out that many moral conservatives, including myself, are tired of being threatened by Republican apologists of the disasters that will happen if we fail to vote for Republicans.
Babbin predictably raised the specter of Hillary Clinton, asserting that by attacking President Bush I was only electing Hillary, the real enemy Babbin thinks we should be united to oppose.
I tried to explain to Babbin that I am much closer to Richard Viguerie's position on the question, arguing that the Republican Party should win our support, not demand it.
Viguerie, who is widely credited with developing the direct response fundraising techniques that have supported the advancement of conservative causes since the presidency of Ronald Reagan, is author of a book entitled, "Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause."
Viguerie argues that just because a politician is Republican does not mean the politician is a conservative or a strong Christian with deep moral and religious convictions.
I also tried to explain to Babbin my view that right now, the Republican Party is controlled by what used to be called the "Rockefeller Wing."
Like David Rockefeller himself, the Rockefeller Wing involves millionaires and billionaires who run multi-national corporations.
Rockefeller Wing Republicans are already beyond borders in their determination to advance their multinational corporations for unbridled profit, whether on not U.S. sovereignty and the middle class are destroyed in the process.
I have reflected that Howard Phillips was probably right when he urged Ronald Reagan to form his own, new political party.
I'm not sure the moral Christians belong in the same party with the Rockefeller Republicans.
At any rate, George W. Bush in his second term seems determined to destroy the Reagan coalition once and for all.
Moral conservatives, including myself, are getting tired of being told we need to vote for Republican candidates, even if the candidates have a history of supporting abortion, such as Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney.
Why is it that once Republicans like George W. Bush win office, they ignore the agenda of the conservatives and moral Christians who elected them, to the point of ridiculing our goals and objectives?
I wrote in Human Events that if President Bush had campaigned openly in 2004 about his plans to create the SPP, he might not have won a single red state.
Now, apologists like Medved and Babbin tell us that a North American Union could never happen because we would have to vote to amend the Constitution.
The argument is non-responsive. In Europe, the elite and multi-national corporations who favored creating regional government did so incrementally, creating a fait accompli before anybody got to vote. That's the point.
We now have 10 percent of Mexico's population living in the United States as Mexican nationals. As a result, we have already become a dual country, whether we like it or not, and I don't remember that anybody was ever given the chance to vote on it.
So, when President Bush signed in October 2006 a law requiring that a fence be built on our border with Mexico, was the point only to achieve a public relations edge before the November voting?
Why does Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., have to write President Bush reminding him that we have so far built fewer than 20 miles of that fence and are behind the congressionally mandated schedule specified in the legislation?
We voted to secure our borders, and look where that got us – nowhere.
I was also shocked when President Bush neglected to attend the recent funerals of the Reverends Jerry Falwell and D. James Kennedy.
Neither President Bush nor his father would most likely have been elected president had it not been for the active support of ministers of national prestige such as Falwell and Kennedy.
At the dinner debate, Babbin contended that the SPP trilateral working groups were inconsequential in impact, reflecting merely normal trade dialogue between neighbor countries.
If the SPP is inconsequential, then why should anybody object to those of us who want the SPP working groups disbanded, or alternatively, brought before Congress for vigorous oversight?
Electing Republicans is not my priority. Electing moral Christian politicians who will remain true to constitutional principles is my goal.
My point speaking to the Eagle Council last Friday was that if George W. Bush continues to talk about Mexico and insists upon open borders while Mexico has a drug war raging and Mexican trucks running their long-haul rigs in the U.S. whether safe or not, then the Republican Party will and should be reduced to a minority party.
We would be better off without a Republican Party if having a Republican Party means we continue compromising U.S. sovereignty under this false banner of one-sided trade agreements that have nothing to do with legitimate "free trade."
If Human Events under Babbin's editorial direction is to become an apologists' forum for Republican Party true believers, so be it.
My point is that there are not enough Republican Party true believers to win a national presidential election without the moral Christians brought into the GOP by Ronald Reagan.
Even given the millions and billions available to the Rockefeller Wing to proselytize their point of view, railing against liberals and Democrats will not succeed if the strategy includes demonizing those of us who have supported Republicans, but who now want raise legitimate questions about George W. Bush.
Today, unfortunately, on issues of illegal immigration and open borders, it is hard to tell apart many Republicans from most Democrats.
If we get a Bush-Clinton dynasty extending to a Hillary Clinton presidency, we will get more globalism. But the problem is that all the top tier Republican candidates for president are themselves members of the Council on Foreign relations. So what's the difference?
The editors of Human Events were not calling me a "black helicopter conspiracy theorist" when I championed in the 2004 presidential election campaign the arguments against John Kerry argued by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
It's seems ironic to me that I was a great hero to these Republican Party apologists in 2004 when I spoke out against John Kerry, but now I'm not even qualified to be listed as a columnist on Human Events, despite the popularity of my writings there, just because I happen to be criticizing a Republican president I think has gone seriously astray.
For too many decades now, conservatives and moral Christians have been conditioned by Republican Party apologists, editors and their talk-show hosts allies to think our only mission is to oppose liberals and defeat Democrats.
Today, that's not enough.
The Republican Party has got to learn that we will find alternatives to the Republican Party itself, especially if it continues to abandon our cherished principles and then sets out to ridicule and demonize us for pointing this out.
The argument at the banquet dinner table ended when Phyllis Schlafly called me to the dais to receive Eagle Forum's annual award for courageous reporting, presented with a framed painting of an eagle, inscribed "with appreciation for your courage and leadership in protecting America's sovereignty."
I see today that Robert Bluey is currently the director of the Center for Media & Public Policy at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C.
I'm sure Robert remains a strong supporter of Republican Party candidates and issues, even in his new blog.
But in what I have read of his blog so far, Robert does not cross the line into becoming a Republican Party apologist, a distinction I admired when he served, I believe with distinction, as the editor of Human Events.
Posted: September 25, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
In a heated conversation at the Friday banquet of Phyllis Schalfly's Eagle Council meeting in St. Louis last week, Jed Babbin, editor of Human Events, repeated accusations that I am a "black helicopter Internet conspiracy theorist" for arguing that the Bush administration is pursing the North American Union and NAFTA Superhighways through the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.
In response, I observed that Babbin has taken Human Events in the direction of becoming an apologist for the Republican Party, not a critical forum for conservative debate.
What is difficult to understand is that many of the articles I first wrote exploring these subjects were first published last year in Human Events, under the editorial direction of Babbin's predecessor, Robert Bluey.
Beginning in 2006, a year before Babbin was appointed editor, I began exploring the Trans-Texas Corridor and Interstate, which has been called the NAFTA Superhighway since 1998. I began looking into the Security and Prosperity Partnership President Bush declared with Mexico and Canada at the end of the trilateral summit in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005.
Out of these articles I began to see a pattern of North American integration under SPP that developed into the major argument of my current New York Times best-selling book, "The Late Great USA: The Coming Merger with Mexico and Canada."
(Column continues below)
These Human Events articles were widely popular, in some weeks last year constituting as many as two or three of the 10 most read articles published that week on the Human Events website.
Yet, today, Babbin has even removed my name from the list of columnists published on Human Events and I've transitioned to becoming a full-time staff reporter at WND.
Evidently, Babbin's criticism of me represents a repudiation of the editorial standards Human Events established under Bluey, because Robert regularly encouraged me to continue exploring these issues.
Babbin's accusations were even more surprising, coming at a formal dinner where usually everybody is well behaved and respectful, even if only for the duration of the event.
But Babbin's charges are nothing new.
As WND has reported, President Bush at the recent SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec, ridiculed as a "conspiracy theory" the suggestion that the SPP might be aimed at creating a North American Union and promoting NAFTA Superhighways.
This line of criticism has been echoed by several radio talk-show hosts, including movie critic Michael Medved, whose tirades on the subject often seem to degenerate into name-calling irrationality.
I tried to explain to Babbin that moral Christians are not Republican Party apologists by definition.
Moreover, ridiculing us for adhering to our principles is not going to win over our votes in the coming 2008 election.
My conflict with Babbin began months ago, with the first piece I ever submitted to him, back when he first took over from Bluey in February.
That piece explained how the value-added tax functions to make unfair many of our "free trade" agreements. Babbin rejected the piece, saying it was too "wonkish" for him.
The issue of the value-added tax seen as an unfair aspect of U.S. "free trade" agreements was being pressed by the noted conservative activist businessman Roger Milliken of Milliken & Co., and the subject was the focus of a training session conducted by Phyllis Schlafly at Eagle Forum.
The criticism struck me as odd, perhaps because I consider "wonkish" the type of name-calling pejorative I was subjected to by kids on the playground in grade school who called me "four eyes" for wearing glasses.
The value-added tax is an important issue, even if it may appear to some to be technical or requiring some attention to complex economics to fully appreciate. But to call the issue "wonkish" was not the type of constructive criticism a writer expects from an editor, but appeared juvenile at best.
Schlafly subsequently had an article on the value-added tax accepted by Babbin and published on Human Events, making me think that Babbin's criticism of me was always ad hominem related and personal in nature, stemming from some animosity that I fail to comprehend.
My article on the value-added tax was subsequently published by World Net Daily.
As WND reported over the weekend, my speech last Friday at the St. Louis Eagle Council meeting centered on "The Late Great USA" and my argument that President Bush's determination to press a North American integration agenda against the will of the American people could cost the Republican Party the 2008 presidential election and the loss of two-thirds of the seats in the Senate and the House of Representatives.
In that speech, I reminded the Eagle Council audience that Karl Rove was the architect of the 2006 Republican Party electoral debacle as well as the 2004 presidential win.
I cautioned that if President Bush does not quit talking about Mexican guest workers, Mexican trucks and illegal-alien paths to citizenship, the 2006 mid-term election might be just a prelude to the electoral disaster the Republican Party will face in 2008.
At dinner that evening, Babbin chided me to get off these "black helicopter conspiracy themes," or risk electing Hillary Clinton as a consequence.
I took offense at Babbin's continued tendency to insult me rather than argue with me over issues I take seriously. I reflected that personal animosity has no place in serious professional discourse on politics.
The argument became even more heated when I pointed out that many moral conservatives, including myself, are tired of being threatened by Republican apologists of the disasters that will happen if we fail to vote for Republicans.
Babbin predictably raised the specter of Hillary Clinton, asserting that by attacking President Bush I was only electing Hillary, the real enemy Babbin thinks we should be united to oppose.
I tried to explain to Babbin that I am much closer to Richard Viguerie's position on the question, arguing that the Republican Party should win our support, not demand it.
Viguerie, who is widely credited with developing the direct response fundraising techniques that have supported the advancement of conservative causes since the presidency of Ronald Reagan, is author of a book entitled, "Conservatives Betrayed: How George W. Bush and Other Big Government Republicans Hijacked the Conservative Cause."
Viguerie argues that just because a politician is Republican does not mean the politician is a conservative or a strong Christian with deep moral and religious convictions.
I also tried to explain to Babbin my view that right now, the Republican Party is controlled by what used to be called the "Rockefeller Wing."
Like David Rockefeller himself, the Rockefeller Wing involves millionaires and billionaires who run multi-national corporations.
Rockefeller Wing Republicans are already beyond borders in their determination to advance their multinational corporations for unbridled profit, whether on not U.S. sovereignty and the middle class are destroyed in the process.
I have reflected that Howard Phillips was probably right when he urged Ronald Reagan to form his own, new political party.
I'm not sure the moral Christians belong in the same party with the Rockefeller Republicans.
At any rate, George W. Bush in his second term seems determined to destroy the Reagan coalition once and for all.
Moral conservatives, including myself, are getting tired of being told we need to vote for Republican candidates, even if the candidates have a history of supporting abortion, such as Rudy Giuliani or Mitt Romney.
Why is it that once Republicans like George W. Bush win office, they ignore the agenda of the conservatives and moral Christians who elected them, to the point of ridiculing our goals and objectives?
I wrote in Human Events that if President Bush had campaigned openly in 2004 about his plans to create the SPP, he might not have won a single red state.
Now, apologists like Medved and Babbin tell us that a North American Union could never happen because we would have to vote to amend the Constitution.
The argument is non-responsive. In Europe, the elite and multi-national corporations who favored creating regional government did so incrementally, creating a fait accompli before anybody got to vote. That's the point.
We now have 10 percent of Mexico's population living in the United States as Mexican nationals. As a result, we have already become a dual country, whether we like it or not, and I don't remember that anybody was ever given the chance to vote on it.
So, when President Bush signed in October 2006 a law requiring that a fence be built on our border with Mexico, was the point only to achieve a public relations edge before the November voting?
Why does Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., have to write President Bush reminding him that we have so far built fewer than 20 miles of that fence and are behind the congressionally mandated schedule specified in the legislation?
We voted to secure our borders, and look where that got us – nowhere.
I was also shocked when President Bush neglected to attend the recent funerals of the Reverends Jerry Falwell and D. James Kennedy.
Neither President Bush nor his father would most likely have been elected president had it not been for the active support of ministers of national prestige such as Falwell and Kennedy.
At the dinner debate, Babbin contended that the SPP trilateral working groups were inconsequential in impact, reflecting merely normal trade dialogue between neighbor countries.
If the SPP is inconsequential, then why should anybody object to those of us who want the SPP working groups disbanded, or alternatively, brought before Congress for vigorous oversight?
Electing Republicans is not my priority. Electing moral Christian politicians who will remain true to constitutional principles is my goal.
My point speaking to the Eagle Council last Friday was that if George W. Bush continues to talk about Mexico and insists upon open borders while Mexico has a drug war raging and Mexican trucks running their long-haul rigs in the U.S. whether safe or not, then the Republican Party will and should be reduced to a minority party.
We would be better off without a Republican Party if having a Republican Party means we continue compromising U.S. sovereignty under this false banner of one-sided trade agreements that have nothing to do with legitimate "free trade."
If Human Events under Babbin's editorial direction is to become an apologists' forum for Republican Party true believers, so be it.
My point is that there are not enough Republican Party true believers to win a national presidential election without the moral Christians brought into the GOP by Ronald Reagan.
Even given the millions and billions available to the Rockefeller Wing to proselytize their point of view, railing against liberals and Democrats will not succeed if the strategy includes demonizing those of us who have supported Republicans, but who now want raise legitimate questions about George W. Bush.
Today, unfortunately, on issues of illegal immigration and open borders, it is hard to tell apart many Republicans from most Democrats.
If we get a Bush-Clinton dynasty extending to a Hillary Clinton presidency, we will get more globalism. But the problem is that all the top tier Republican candidates for president are themselves members of the Council on Foreign relations. So what's the difference?
The editors of Human Events were not calling me a "black helicopter conspiracy theorist" when I championed in the 2004 presidential election campaign the arguments against John Kerry argued by the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
It's seems ironic to me that I was a great hero to these Republican Party apologists in 2004 when I spoke out against John Kerry, but now I'm not even qualified to be listed as a columnist on Human Events, despite the popularity of my writings there, just because I happen to be criticizing a Republican president I think has gone seriously astray.
For too many decades now, conservatives and moral Christians have been conditioned by Republican Party apologists, editors and their talk-show hosts allies to think our only mission is to oppose liberals and defeat Democrats.
Today, that's not enough.
The Republican Party has got to learn that we will find alternatives to the Republican Party itself, especially if it continues to abandon our cherished principles and then sets out to ridicule and demonize us for pointing this out.
The argument at the banquet dinner table ended when Phyllis Schlafly called me to the dais to receive Eagle Forum's annual award for courageous reporting, presented with a framed painting of an eagle, inscribed "with appreciation for your courage and leadership in protecting America's sovereignty."
I see today that Robert Bluey is currently the director of the Center for Media & Public Policy at the Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C.
I'm sure Robert remains a strong supporter of Republican Party candidates and issues, even in his new blog.
But in what I have read of his blog so far, Robert does not cross the line into becoming a Republican Party apologist, a distinction I admired when he served, I believe with distinction, as the editor of Human Events.
City of Miami and Staples to Break Ground on First LEED-Registered Green Retail Building in City
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070924006077&newsLang=en
City of Miami and Staples to Break Ground on First LEED-Registered Green Retail Building in City
Developer MK Real Estate Group to Pursue LEED Certification for Staples Biscayne Blvd. Store
MIAMI--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Staples (Nasdaq: SPLS), the world’s largest office products company, along with the City of Miami and MK Real Estate Group, will host a groundbreaking event for Miami’s first green retail building registered with the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). The event will take place at the Staples store building site located at 2121 Biscayne Boulevard, on Fri., Sept. 28 at 11 a.m., where Mayor Manny Diaz and Staples Regional Vice President Royce Reed will celebrate the City’s progress in sustaining its future through eco-friendly practices.
“Building green is smart growth and with partners like Staples, the City of Miami can achieve its goal of becoming a model city for sustainable living,” said Miami Mayor Manny Diaz.
MK Real Estate Group is building the 2121 Biscayne Boulevard Staples store in compliance with LEED silver certification standards. If accomplished, this building will be the first LEED-certified retail store in the City of Miami, and the first store of its kind for Staples.
The store’s green design will help:
Improve energy performance and reduce “heat island effect” contributing to higher city temperatures through a highly reflective roofing system;
Reduce the strain on municipal water and Florida aquifer reserves by collecting rainwater through rooftop gutter systems and installing waterless urinals and low-flow toilets;
Preserve non-renewable, virgin resources by using drywall, steel, concrete, bathroom partitions, carpet and parking stops made from recycled materials;
Protect and restore habitats by landscaping with 100 percent native plants and shrubs;
Encourage alternative transportation by installing bike racks and showers;
Lead recycling efforts by having on-site recycling for paper, plastic, glass, and cardboard, in addition to computer, electronics and ink cartridge recycling offered by Staples stores every day.
"It's wonderful to see a company like Staples making a commitment to green building," said Tom Hicks, vice president of LEED, U.S. Green Building Council. "Green buildings are environmentally responsible, healthier for the building's users and employees and are more profitable structures."
LEED certification is a voluntary independent green building rating system. Buildings meeting LEED standards minimize negative environmental impacts and maximize energy efficiency and sustainability. Criteria evaluated for LEED certification include sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, indoor environmental quality, and innovation and design process.
“Staples is committed to sustainable business practices throughout our organization, and we make it easy for customers to make a difference for the environment – what we call EcoEasy,” said Royce Reed, regional vice president of sales and operations for Staples stores in South Florida. “Sustainable building design helps us conserve natural resources, reduce waste and create a healthier environment for our local communities. It’s also good, smart business. When completed, the 2121 Biscayne Staples will make it easy for customers to get the office products and services they need, including many eco-friendly products and recycling offerings.”
Building a green store in South Florida is one of Staples many eco-friendly practices, which also include recycling, offering a wide assortment of eco-friendly products, investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy and educating customers and associates about sustainability. Through its EcoEasy commitment, Staples makes it easy for customers to make a difference for the environment by offering more than 2,900 recycled-content products and providing everyday, in-store recycling for computers, office technology, personal electronics and ink and toner cartridges. For more on Staples environmental initiatives, please visit www.staples.com/ecoeasy.
“We are very pleased to be a part of both Staples’ and the Mayor’s commitment to green initiatives by building a store that will continue to provide long-term economic, social and environmental benefits,” says Bill Biondi, president of MK Real Estate Group. “Our goal is to provide a healthy environment for Staples and the surrounding neighborhood for years to come.”
Contacts
Gordon Reyes & Co.
Seth Gordon, 305-381-8831
C: 305-322-3121
seth@gordonreyes.com
or
For Staples, Inc.
Nikisha Williams, 305-572-1387
C: 305-725-0526
nwilliams@golinharris.com
__________________________________________________________
BELCH! So, after they take my car away and force me to bike (to save the enviroment of course, because soon to drive a car you will have to pay an enviromental tax). Now I can also shower in the store!!! Goodie... I can't tell you how many times I've been out shopping and said to myself. Damn, I wish I could take a shower right now!.. I gotta tell you it's as if someone was reading my mind!
City of Miami and Staples to Break Ground on First LEED-Registered Green Retail Building in City
Developer MK Real Estate Group to Pursue LEED Certification for Staples Biscayne Blvd. Store
MIAMI--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Staples (Nasdaq: SPLS), the world’s largest office products company, along with the City of Miami and MK Real Estate Group, will host a groundbreaking event for Miami’s first green retail building registered with the U.S. Green Building Council’s Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED). The event will take place at the Staples store building site located at 2121 Biscayne Boulevard, on Fri., Sept. 28 at 11 a.m., where Mayor Manny Diaz and Staples Regional Vice President Royce Reed will celebrate the City’s progress in sustaining its future through eco-friendly practices.
“Building green is smart growth and with partners like Staples, the City of Miami can achieve its goal of becoming a model city for sustainable living,” said Miami Mayor Manny Diaz.
MK Real Estate Group is building the 2121 Biscayne Boulevard Staples store in compliance with LEED silver certification standards. If accomplished, this building will be the first LEED-certified retail store in the City of Miami, and the first store of its kind for Staples.
The store’s green design will help:
Improve energy performance and reduce “heat island effect” contributing to higher city temperatures through a highly reflective roofing system;
Reduce the strain on municipal water and Florida aquifer reserves by collecting rainwater through rooftop gutter systems and installing waterless urinals and low-flow toilets;
Preserve non-renewable, virgin resources by using drywall, steel, concrete, bathroom partitions, carpet and parking stops made from recycled materials;
Protect and restore habitats by landscaping with 100 percent native plants and shrubs;
Encourage alternative transportation by installing bike racks and showers;
Lead recycling efforts by having on-site recycling for paper, plastic, glass, and cardboard, in addition to computer, electronics and ink cartridge recycling offered by Staples stores every day.
"It's wonderful to see a company like Staples making a commitment to green building," said Tom Hicks, vice president of LEED, U.S. Green Building Council. "Green buildings are environmentally responsible, healthier for the building's users and employees and are more profitable structures."
LEED certification is a voluntary independent green building rating system. Buildings meeting LEED standards minimize negative environmental impacts and maximize energy efficiency and sustainability. Criteria evaluated for LEED certification include sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, indoor environmental quality, and innovation and design process.
“Staples is committed to sustainable business practices throughout our organization, and we make it easy for customers to make a difference for the environment – what we call EcoEasy,” said Royce Reed, regional vice president of sales and operations for Staples stores in South Florida. “Sustainable building design helps us conserve natural resources, reduce waste and create a healthier environment for our local communities. It’s also good, smart business. When completed, the 2121 Biscayne Staples will make it easy for customers to get the office products and services they need, including many eco-friendly products and recycling offerings.”
Building a green store in South Florida is one of Staples many eco-friendly practices, which also include recycling, offering a wide assortment of eco-friendly products, investing in energy efficiency and renewable energy and educating customers and associates about sustainability. Through its EcoEasy commitment, Staples makes it easy for customers to make a difference for the environment by offering more than 2,900 recycled-content products and providing everyday, in-store recycling for computers, office technology, personal electronics and ink and toner cartridges. For more on Staples environmental initiatives, please visit www.staples.com/ecoeasy.
“We are very pleased to be a part of both Staples’ and the Mayor’s commitment to green initiatives by building a store that will continue to provide long-term economic, social and environmental benefits,” says Bill Biondi, president of MK Real Estate Group. “Our goal is to provide a healthy environment for Staples and the surrounding neighborhood for years to come.”
Contacts
Gordon Reyes & Co.
Seth Gordon, 305-381-8831
C: 305-322-3121
seth@gordonreyes.com
or
For Staples, Inc.
Nikisha Williams, 305-572-1387
C: 305-725-0526
nwilliams@golinharris.com
__________________________________________________________
BELCH! So, after they take my car away and force me to bike (to save the enviroment of course, because soon to drive a car you will have to pay an enviromental tax). Now I can also shower in the store!!! Goodie... I can't tell you how many times I've been out shopping and said to myself. Damn, I wish I could take a shower right now!.. I gotta tell you it's as if someone was reading my mind!
Global majority wants action on climate change
http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL2489301520070925?feedType=RSS&feedName=domesticNews&rpc=451
Global majority wants action on climate change
LONDON (Reuters) - Almost two-thirds of the world's people say there must be urgent action to tackle global warming, a poll for the BBC World Service showed on Tuesday.
Overall, 65 percent of the 22,000 people polled in 21 countries said there was a need "to take major steps very soon" ranging from 91 percent in Spain to 37 percent in India.
In the United States, the world's biggest emitter of climate changing carbon gases, 59 percent called for urgent action and in China, which builds a coal-fired power station every five days to feed its booming economy, it was 70 percent.
The poll showed nine out of 10 people want some action on climate change, and 79 percent said human activity was contributing significantly to the problem that scientists say will cause major hardship worldwide.
The poll surveyed people in 14 of the 16 nations invited to a meeting of major world carbon emitters in Washington this week by George W. Bush, who has rejected calls for the United States to sign up to the Kyoto Protocol on cutting emissions.
Washington is still opposed to timetables or targets and argues technology holds the answers.
The poll showed 73 percent of people on average agreed developing states should limit their emissions in return for financial aid and technological transfer from developed nations.
Support for this ranged from 90 percent in China to 47 percent in India. It was 70 percent in the United States, 81 percent in Britain and 78 percent in France.
Knowledge of climate change varied widely across the world, with 62 percent in France but just 5 percent in Russia saying they had heard or read a great deal about it, while in Indonesia 47 percent said they knew little about it.
The poll was conducted for the BBC by PIPA, the Programme on International Policy Attitudes, at the University of Maryland, using a combination of face-to-face and telephone interviews.
__________________________________________________________________
Okay... Can I just say I don't believe a word of this. First off, the BBC is a liberal/socialist media outlet that spews whatever garbage is given to them. Amazing how they never give concrete information of the data range and the exact questions asked. If you ask me... Hey, do you like the enviroment and hate pollution? I would answer yes. Does that mean I want to stop driving my car or pay to drink from the public water system? NO!!!!
Just so everyone knows the ext major liberal agenda is to push for global taxes to save the enviroment. Who will pay the global tax you ask???? Well, that would be you! and me, and well the rest of us "little" people who don't make millions a year.
Global majority wants action on climate change
LONDON (Reuters) - Almost two-thirds of the world's people say there must be urgent action to tackle global warming, a poll for the BBC World Service showed on Tuesday.
Overall, 65 percent of the 22,000 people polled in 21 countries said there was a need "to take major steps very soon" ranging from 91 percent in Spain to 37 percent in India.
In the United States, the world's biggest emitter of climate changing carbon gases, 59 percent called for urgent action and in China, which builds a coal-fired power station every five days to feed its booming economy, it was 70 percent.
The poll showed nine out of 10 people want some action on climate change, and 79 percent said human activity was contributing significantly to the problem that scientists say will cause major hardship worldwide.
The poll surveyed people in 14 of the 16 nations invited to a meeting of major world carbon emitters in Washington this week by George W. Bush, who has rejected calls for the United States to sign up to the Kyoto Protocol on cutting emissions.
Washington is still opposed to timetables or targets and argues technology holds the answers.
The poll showed 73 percent of people on average agreed developing states should limit their emissions in return for financial aid and technological transfer from developed nations.
Support for this ranged from 90 percent in China to 47 percent in India. It was 70 percent in the United States, 81 percent in Britain and 78 percent in France.
Knowledge of climate change varied widely across the world, with 62 percent in France but just 5 percent in Russia saying they had heard or read a great deal about it, while in Indonesia 47 percent said they knew little about it.
The poll was conducted for the BBC by PIPA, the Programme on International Policy Attitudes, at the University of Maryland, using a combination of face-to-face and telephone interviews.
__________________________________________________________________
Okay... Can I just say I don't believe a word of this. First off, the BBC is a liberal/socialist media outlet that spews whatever garbage is given to them. Amazing how they never give concrete information of the data range and the exact questions asked. If you ask me... Hey, do you like the enviroment and hate pollution? I would answer yes. Does that mean I want to stop driving my car or pay to drink from the public water system? NO!!!!
Just so everyone knows the ext major liberal agenda is to push for global taxes to save the enviroment. Who will pay the global tax you ask???? Well, that would be you! and me, and well the rest of us "little" people who don't make millions a year.
CEOs, Bush Rangers Rebuff Republicans on War, Widening Deficit
CEOs, Bush Rangers Rebuff Republicans on War, Widening Deficit
By Michael Janofsky
Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Dozens of corporate executives who backed President George W. Bush for re-election in 2004, including some of his top fund-raisers, are now helping Democrats running for president.
John Mack, chief executive officer of Morgan Stanley, Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corp., and Terry Semel, chairman of Yahoo! Inc., are among some 60 executives writing checks to Democrats such as Senators Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, a review of U.S. Federal Election Commission records shows.
While the vast majority of business leaders still back Republicans for 2008, the stature of some of those donating to Democrats suggests that support may be eroding, seven years into the Bush presidency. Some executives expressed concern over Republican positions on issues ranging from the war in Iraq and stem-cell research to global warming and the fiscal deficit.
The shift in political-spending patterns is ``very unusual,'' says Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a Washington-based group that advocates campaign-finance reform.
``Normally, if you have dissatisfaction with the administration, you figure out who in your own party you'll support in the next election,'' he says. ``You don't look at other parties.''
The Democratic victory in last November's congressional elections may have also sparked greater interest in the party. ``Money tends to follow people who have power,'' Wertheimer says.
`Strong Asset'
Bush sounded unconcerned yesterday that he might adversely affect Republican chances next year. Asked at a White House news conference if he were ``an asset or liability'' to members of his party seeking election, he replied, ``Strong asset.''
Nonetheless, some of his strongest supporters are wavering -- or at least hedging their bets.
Sig Rogich, president of Rogich Communications Group in Las Vegas, raised at least $200,000 for Bush in 2004, earning the campaign's designation of ``Ranger.'' This year, Rogich gave $2,300 to Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico, a Democrat, and $4,600 to Senator John McCain of Arizona, a Republican, according to the most recent election records, which go through June 30.
``Conservatives have two hard-core beliefs,'' says Rogich. ``They favor lower taxes and lower spending.'' Federal spending is ``the highest in the history of the nation,'' he says.
Morgan Stanley's Mack, another of Bush's Rangers, held a fund-raiser for Clinton, a New York senator, in July.
`Beyond Party Labels'
``When it comes to supporting a political candidate, I have always looked beyond party labels to the person I felt was best for the job and most able to lead the country forward,'' Mack wrote to executives of the New York-based company in June, explaining his choice. ``I personally believe that person is Hillary Clinton.''
Murdoch, who donated $25,000 to the Republican National Committee in 2004, has given Clinton $2,300. Semel of Sunnyvale, California-based Yahoo!, who gave $2,000 to Bush in 2004 and $50,000 to the Republican National Committee, has given the maximum, $4,600, to Clinton and $2,300 to Obama.
The Republican National Committee says executives will continue to overwhelmingly back the party, citing its candidates' stances on issues such as cutting taxes and curbing lawsuits.
``We fully expect our nominee to have the resources to run a successful campaign,'' says Dan Ronayne, a spokesman for the RNC.
Outdoing Republicans
Through the latest FEC reporting period, the three leading Democrats -- Clinton, Obama and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards -- out-raised the three leading Republicans -- former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and McCain, $145.2 million to $103.3 million.
Spokesmen for Romney and the latest Republican to enter the field, former Senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee, say they're also confident of their corporate backing.
``We're very happy with the level of giving from individuals in the private sector,'' says Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom. Among executives who have donated to Romney are Richard Farmer, chairman of Cintas Corp. of Cincinnati, the largest U.S. uniform supplier, and Ray Irani, chairman of Los Angeles-based Occidental Petroleum Corp., the fourth-largest U.S. oil company.
Spokesmen for Giuliani and McCain didn't return calls seeking comment.
Personal Choices
Mack, Murdoch and Semel declined to discuss their political choices. Tom Nides, chief administrative officer for Morgan Stanley, agreed to read aloud parts of Mack's letter.
Most of the executives declined requests to comment through spokesmen, saying the donations reflect personal choices.
Jeffrey Volk, a managing director at Citigroup in New York, was an exception. He says he grew disenchanted with Republicans after the federal government failed to provide more help to the Gulf region after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. He says he remains a Republican, although he's supporting Clinton.
``It was absolutely inconceivable to me that after 9/11 another catastrophe could hit a major American city, and the United States government was not prepared,'' he says.
John Canning, a deputy board chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago and CEO of Madison Dearborn Partners LLC, expressed similar misgivings.
A Bush Pioneer in 2004 who has given Obama $2,300, he described the Republican Party in an April interview as ``neanderthal'' for its positions on stem-cell research and global warming. He says he liked Obama's opposition to the war in Iraq and his approach to reducing greenhouse gases.
Not On `Same Page'
``I no longer find myself on the same page,'' he says of Republicans.
The Bush administration opposes more federal spending on human embryonic stem-cell research. On global warming, the administration has been criticized by scientists for a slow response to evidence of climate change.
Elaine Wynn, who has donated to Republicans in previous cycles along with her husband, Steve Wynn, chairman and CEO of Wynn Resorts Ltd. in Las Vegas, is serving as a member of the Obama campaign ``steering committee'' in Nevada.
Wynn, whose husband is a trustee of former President George H.W. Bush's presidential library, says she grew weary of two decades of leadership under two President Bushes and President Bill Clinton, with the possibility of another Clinton ahead.
`Two Families'
``That's a big chunk of my life overseen by two families,'' she says. ``I'd like to think this is a broad country with more people to weigh in.''
She says she remains a Republican yet was attracted to Obama more by seeing young adults drawn to him, rather than any disenchantment with the current president.
``I jumped on their bandwagon,'' she says.
Gerald Keim, associate dean of MBA programs at Arizona State University who has written extensively on corporate political activity, says executives would have little to gain by discussing their political preferences because shareholders and customers might not hold the same views.
``Most of this is very pragmatic,'' Keim says. ``This is about having relationships so an executive can have a voice heard on issues that affect the current or future operations of their companies.''
Number Will Grow
Keim says the number of Republican business leaders supporting Democrats will ``absolutely grow as it becomes clear who the Democrat nominee is.''
Among others who have already given are Richard Kelly of Xcel Energy Inc. of Minneapolis, who donated $1,000 to Bush last time and has given $2,000 to Richardson. Raymond Mason of Legg Mason Inc. in Baltimore gave Bush $2,000 in the last cycle and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, a Democrat and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, $2,300 this cycle.
Other former Rangers and Pioneers helping Democrats are Lance Weaver, vice chairman of FIA Card Services, who gave $4,600 to Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware, and Robert Congel, senior managing director of Pyramid Cos., who gave Clinton $4,600. Neither responded to requests for an interview.
Richard Notebaert, who recently retired as CEO of Denver- based Qwest Communications International Inc., contributed $25,000 to the Republican National Committee in 2004 and thousands more to candidates in both parties. This cycle, he has given Richardson and McCain $2,300 each.
He called Richardson ``a good man'' and McCain ``an outstanding individual'' but says it was still too early to choose sides.
To contact the reporter on this story: Michael Janofsky in Los Angeles at mjanofsky@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: September 21, 2007 00:16 EDT
By Michael Janofsky
Sept. 21 (Bloomberg) -- Dozens of corporate executives who backed President George W. Bush for re-election in 2004, including some of his top fund-raisers, are now helping Democrats running for president.
John Mack, chief executive officer of Morgan Stanley, Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corp., and Terry Semel, chairman of Yahoo! Inc., are among some 60 executives writing checks to Democrats such as Senators Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, a review of U.S. Federal Election Commission records shows.
While the vast majority of business leaders still back Republicans for 2008, the stature of some of those donating to Democrats suggests that support may be eroding, seven years into the Bush presidency. Some executives expressed concern over Republican positions on issues ranging from the war in Iraq and stem-cell research to global warming and the fiscal deficit.
The shift in political-spending patterns is ``very unusual,'' says Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a Washington-based group that advocates campaign-finance reform.
``Normally, if you have dissatisfaction with the administration, you figure out who in your own party you'll support in the next election,'' he says. ``You don't look at other parties.''
The Democratic victory in last November's congressional elections may have also sparked greater interest in the party. ``Money tends to follow people who have power,'' Wertheimer says.
`Strong Asset'
Bush sounded unconcerned yesterday that he might adversely affect Republican chances next year. Asked at a White House news conference if he were ``an asset or liability'' to members of his party seeking election, he replied, ``Strong asset.''
Nonetheless, some of his strongest supporters are wavering -- or at least hedging their bets.
Sig Rogich, president of Rogich Communications Group in Las Vegas, raised at least $200,000 for Bush in 2004, earning the campaign's designation of ``Ranger.'' This year, Rogich gave $2,300 to Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico, a Democrat, and $4,600 to Senator John McCain of Arizona, a Republican, according to the most recent election records, which go through June 30.
``Conservatives have two hard-core beliefs,'' says Rogich. ``They favor lower taxes and lower spending.'' Federal spending is ``the highest in the history of the nation,'' he says.
Morgan Stanley's Mack, another of Bush's Rangers, held a fund-raiser for Clinton, a New York senator, in July.
`Beyond Party Labels'
``When it comes to supporting a political candidate, I have always looked beyond party labels to the person I felt was best for the job and most able to lead the country forward,'' Mack wrote to executives of the New York-based company in June, explaining his choice. ``I personally believe that person is Hillary Clinton.''
Murdoch, who donated $25,000 to the Republican National Committee in 2004, has given Clinton $2,300. Semel of Sunnyvale, California-based Yahoo!, who gave $2,000 to Bush in 2004 and $50,000 to the Republican National Committee, has given the maximum, $4,600, to Clinton and $2,300 to Obama.
The Republican National Committee says executives will continue to overwhelmingly back the party, citing its candidates' stances on issues such as cutting taxes and curbing lawsuits.
``We fully expect our nominee to have the resources to run a successful campaign,'' says Dan Ronayne, a spokesman for the RNC.
Outdoing Republicans
Through the latest FEC reporting period, the three leading Democrats -- Clinton, Obama and former North Carolina Senator John Edwards -- out-raised the three leading Republicans -- former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and McCain, $145.2 million to $103.3 million.
Spokesmen for Romney and the latest Republican to enter the field, former Senator Fred Thompson of Tennessee, say they're also confident of their corporate backing.
``We're very happy with the level of giving from individuals in the private sector,'' says Romney spokesman Eric Fehrnstrom. Among executives who have donated to Romney are Richard Farmer, chairman of Cintas Corp. of Cincinnati, the largest U.S. uniform supplier, and Ray Irani, chairman of Los Angeles-based Occidental Petroleum Corp., the fourth-largest U.S. oil company.
Spokesmen for Giuliani and McCain didn't return calls seeking comment.
Personal Choices
Mack, Murdoch and Semel declined to discuss their political choices. Tom Nides, chief administrative officer for Morgan Stanley, agreed to read aloud parts of Mack's letter.
Most of the executives declined requests to comment through spokesmen, saying the donations reflect personal choices.
Jeffrey Volk, a managing director at Citigroup in New York, was an exception. He says he grew disenchanted with Republicans after the federal government failed to provide more help to the Gulf region after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. He says he remains a Republican, although he's supporting Clinton.
``It was absolutely inconceivable to me that after 9/11 another catastrophe could hit a major American city, and the United States government was not prepared,'' he says.
John Canning, a deputy board chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank in Chicago and CEO of Madison Dearborn Partners LLC, expressed similar misgivings.
A Bush Pioneer in 2004 who has given Obama $2,300, he described the Republican Party in an April interview as ``neanderthal'' for its positions on stem-cell research and global warming. He says he liked Obama's opposition to the war in Iraq and his approach to reducing greenhouse gases.
Not On `Same Page'
``I no longer find myself on the same page,'' he says of Republicans.
The Bush administration opposes more federal spending on human embryonic stem-cell research. On global warming, the administration has been criticized by scientists for a slow response to evidence of climate change.
Elaine Wynn, who has donated to Republicans in previous cycles along with her husband, Steve Wynn, chairman and CEO of Wynn Resorts Ltd. in Las Vegas, is serving as a member of the Obama campaign ``steering committee'' in Nevada.
Wynn, whose husband is a trustee of former President George H.W. Bush's presidential library, says she grew weary of two decades of leadership under two President Bushes and President Bill Clinton, with the possibility of another Clinton ahead.
`Two Families'
``That's a big chunk of my life overseen by two families,'' she says. ``I'd like to think this is a broad country with more people to weigh in.''
She says she remains a Republican yet was attracted to Obama more by seeing young adults drawn to him, rather than any disenchantment with the current president.
``I jumped on their bandwagon,'' she says.
Gerald Keim, associate dean of MBA programs at Arizona State University who has written extensively on corporate political activity, says executives would have little to gain by discussing their political preferences because shareholders and customers might not hold the same views.
``Most of this is very pragmatic,'' Keim says. ``This is about having relationships so an executive can have a voice heard on issues that affect the current or future operations of their companies.''
Number Will Grow
Keim says the number of Republican business leaders supporting Democrats will ``absolutely grow as it becomes clear who the Democrat nominee is.''
Among others who have already given are Richard Kelly of Xcel Energy Inc. of Minneapolis, who donated $1,000 to Bush last time and has given $2,000 to Richardson. Raymond Mason of Legg Mason Inc. in Baltimore gave Bush $2,000 in the last cycle and Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, a Democrat and chairman of the Senate Banking Committee, $2,300 this cycle.
Other former Rangers and Pioneers helping Democrats are Lance Weaver, vice chairman of FIA Card Services, who gave $4,600 to Senator Joseph Biden of Delaware, and Robert Congel, senior managing director of Pyramid Cos., who gave Clinton $4,600. Neither responded to requests for an interview.
Richard Notebaert, who recently retired as CEO of Denver- based Qwest Communications International Inc., contributed $25,000 to the Republican National Committee in 2004 and thousands more to candidates in both parties. This cycle, he has given Richardson and McCain $2,300 each.
He called Richardson ``a good man'' and McCain ``an outstanding individual'' but says it was still too early to choose sides.
To contact the reporter on this story: Michael Janofsky in Los Angeles at mjanofsky@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: September 21, 2007 00:16 EDT
In Illinois, Obama dealt with lobbyists, but as candidate he faults Clinton for ties
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/09/23/in_illinois_obama_dealt_with_lobbyists/
In Illinois, Obama dealt with lobbyists
But as candidate, he faults Clinton for ties
By Scott Helman, Globe Staff | September 23, 2007
(JOHN BAZEMORE/ASSOCIATED PRESS)
When Barack Obama and fellow state lawmakers in Illinois tried to expand healthcare coverage in 2003 with the "Health Care Justice Act," they drew fierce opposition from the insurance industry, which saw it as a back-handed attempt to impose a government-run system.
Over the next 15 months, insurers and their lobbyists found a sympathetic ear in Obama, who amended the bill more to their liking partly because of concerns they raised with him and his aides, according to lobbyists, Senate staff, and Obama's remarks on the Senate floor.
The wrangling over the healthcare measure, which narrowly passed and became law in 2004, illustrates how Obama, during his eight years in the Illinois Senate, was able to shepherd major legislation by negotiating competing interests in Springfield, the state capital. But it also shows how Obama's own experience in lawmaking involved dealings with the kinds of lobbyists and special interests he now demonizes on the campaign trail.
Obama has tried to distinguish himself from rival Hillary Clinton by criticizing her ties to lobbyists and special interests, and, unlike her, refusing to take contributions from federal lobbyists and political action committees. But Clinton supporters say she has been more honest than Obama - including on the healthcare plan she released last week - in acknowledging that industry deserves a role.
"Senator Clinton has learned along the way the importance of both listening to those who are in the field as well as listening to the concerns of the consumer," said Sylvia Larsen, the New Hampshire Senate president and a Clinton backer. Obama "seems to have forgotten the importance of hearing from all sides."
Obama spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Obama's overall experience in Springfield was that lobbyists and special interests wielded too much power, not that they should have no voice in lawmaking. Psaki said Obama had worked with disparate interests to pass many important bills, including not just the Health Care Justice Act but a sweeping ethics overhaul that became the first major change in Illinois campaign finance law in 25 years.
"Barack Obama's experience with this bill and also with his leadership on the ethics reform bill, which he also helped pass in the state Senate, showed him that real change comes not by dividing but by bringing people together to get things done," Psaki said.
The Health Care Justice Act, which Obama sponsored in the state Senate, grew out of work done by the Campaign for Better Health Care, an Illinois coalition of healthcare advocates, labor unions, and nonprofit organizations. The ostensible goal was simple: make affordable healthcare available to all Illinoisans. But the politics were anything but simple.
On one side were healthcare advocates, eager to capitalize on the Democrats having won control of the General Assembly and the governor's office. On the other were most insurers, who worked vigorously to sink the bill. Obama was in the middle, trying to reconcile a range of agendas to get a viable plan signed into law.
The bill originally called for a "Bipartisan Health Care Reform Commission" to implement a program reaching all 12.4 million Illinois residents. The legislation would have made it official state policy to ensure that all residents could access "quality healthcare at costs that are reasonable." Insurers feared that language would result in a government takeover of healthcare, even though the bill did not explicitly say that.
By the time the legislation passed the Senate, in May 2004, Obama had written three successful amendments, at least one of which made key changes favorable to insurers.
Most significant, universal healthcare became merely a policy goal instead of state policy - the proposed commission, renamed the Adequate Health Care Task Force, was charged only with studying how to expand healthcare access. In the same amendment, Obama also sought to give insurers a voice in how the task force developed its plan.
Lobbyists praised Obama for taking the insurance industry's concerns into consideration.
"Barack is a very reasonable person who clearly recognized the various roles involved in the healthcare system," said Phil Lackman, a lobbyist for insurance agents and brokers. Obama "understood our concern that we didn't want a predetermined outcome."
In one attempt at a deal, Obama approached the Campaign for Better Health Care with insurers' concerns, asking if the group would consider a less stringent mandate than requiring the state to come up with a universal healthcare plan. The coalition decided not to bend, said Jim Duffett, the group's executive director.
"The concept of the Health Care Justice Act was to bring the sides - the different perspectives and stakeholders - to the table," Duffett said. "In this situation, Obama was being a conduit from the insurance industry to us."
Obama later watered down the bill after hearing from insurers and after a legal precedent surfaced during the debate indicating that it would be unconstitutional for one legislative assembly to pass a law requiring a future legislative assembly to craft a healthcare plan.
During debate on the bill on May 19, 2004, Obama portrayed himself as a conciliatory figure. He acknowledged that he had "worked diligently with the insurance industry," as well as Republicans, to limit the legislation's reach and noted that the bill had undergone a "complete restructuring" after industry representatives "legitimately" raised fears that it would result in a single-payer system.
"The original presentation of the bill was the House version that we radically changed - we radically changed - and we changed in response to concerns that were raised by the insurance industry," Obama said, according to the session transcript.
During debate over the Health Care Justice Act, Obama also attacked the insurers, accusing the industry of "fear-mongering" by claiming, even after he made changes they wanted, that the bill would lead to a government takeover.
Still, Obama's willingness to hear out insurers and their lobbyists is revealing given the posture he strikes today on the presidential campaign trail - that lobbyists, insurance companies, and other big-industry special interests have an outsized and polluting influence on policy-making in Washington.
In a new television ad his campaign unveiled last week, Obama says that cynics "don't believe we can limit the power of lobbyists who block our progress, or that we can trust the American people with the truth. . . . In 20 years of public service, I've brought Democrats and Republicans together to solve problems that touch the lives of everyday people. I've taken on the drug and insurance companies and won."
And yet while serving in Illinois, Obama was willing to accept campaign contributions from lobbyists. Obama's state Senate campaign committee accepted contributions from insurance companies and their lobbyists - including $1,000 from the Professional Independent Insurance Agents PAC in June 2003, and $1,000 from the Illinois Insurance PAC in December 2003 - while the Health Care Justice Act was wending its way through the Illinois General Assembly. Obama also collected money from the insurance industry and its lobbyists for his successful US Senate campaign in 2004.
Obama's campaign has said that his position on accepting such contributions has evolved and that he decided not to accept them for his presidential campaign after seeing how much influence lobbyists had in Washington during his first two years in the Senate.
The Illinois task force eventually released its healthcare recommendations, including the Illinois mandate that all residents be covered. But Governor Rod Blagojevich has since come out with his own proposal to expand coverage, and the governor and lawmakers are now wrangling over how to proceed.
Some who worked on the bill say Obama recognized then that lobbyists and industry play an integral role in shaping legislation.
"At the end of the day," said Kim Maisch, Illinois state director for the National Federation of Independent Business, "he realized that if he wanted to pass something, you have to work" with lobbyists.
Scott Helman can be reached at shelman@globe.com.
Clinton campaign kills negative story
Clinton campaign kills negative story
By: Ben Smith
Sep 24, 2007 03:43 PM EST
Clintons’ press aides have leverage like Hollywood publicists — less Mitt Romney and more Tom Cruise.
Photo: Composite image by Politico.com
Early this summer, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign for president learned that the men’s magazine GQ was working on a story the campaign was sure to hate: an account of infighting in Hillaryland.
So Clinton’s aides pulled a page from the book of Hollywood publicists and offered GQ a stark choice: Kill the piece, or lose access to planned celebrity coverboy Bill Clinton.
Despite internal protests, GQ editor Jim Nelson met the Clinton campaign’s demands, which had been delivered by Bill Clinton’s spokesman, Jay Carson, several sources familiar with the conversations said. GQ writer George Saunders traveled with Clinton to Africa in July, and Clinton is slated to appear on the cover of GQ’s December issue, in which it traditionally names a “Man of the Year,” according magazine industry sources.
And the offending article by Atlantic Monthly staff writer Josh Green got the spike.
“I don’t really get into the inner workings of the magazine, but I can tell you that yes, we did kill a Hillary piece. We kill pieces all the time for a variety of reasons,” Nelson said in an e-mail to Politico.
He did not respond to follow-up questions. A Clinton campaign spokesman declined to comment.
The campaign’s transaction with GQ opens a curtain on the Clinton campaign’s hard-nosed media strategy, which is far closer in its unromantic view of the press to the campaigns of George W. Bush than to that of Bill Clinton’s free-wheeling 1992 campaign. There’s little left to chance. Hillary Clinton may have an unparalleled campaign “war room” — but there aren’t any documentary film-makers wandering around this one, and lovers of the D.A. Pennebaker film “The War Room” can rest assured they aren’t getting a sequel.
Podhoretz secretly urged Bush to bomb Iran
Clinton picks up backing of red-state Dem
The spiked GQ story also shows how the Clinton campaign has been able to use its access to the most important commodity in media — celebrity, and in fact two bona fide celebrities — to shape not just what gets written about the candidate, but also what doesn’t.
There’s nothing unusual about providing extra access to candidates to reporters seen as sympathetic, and cutting off those seen as hostile to a campaign. The 2004 Bush campaign banned a New York Times reporter from Vice President Dick Cheney’s jet, and Sen. Barack Obama briefly barred Fox News’s Carl Cameron from campaign travel.
But a retreat of the sort GQ is alleged to have made is unusual, particularly as part of what sources described as a barely veiled transaction of editorial leverage for access.
The Clinton campaign is unique in its ability to provide cash value to the media, and particularly the celebrity-driven precincts of television and magazines. Bill Clinton is a favorite cover figure, because his face is viewed within the magazine industry as one that can move product. (Indeed, Green’s own magazine, The Atlantic Monthly, ran as its October cover story “Bill Clinton’s campaign to save the world.”)
It’s a fact that gives the Clintons’ press aides a leverage more familiar to Hollywood publicists than even to her political rivals — less Mitt Romney and more Tom Cruise, whose publicists once required interviewers to sign a statement pledging not to write anything “derogatory” about the star.
The Clinton campaign has more sway with television networks than any rival. At the time Clinton launched her campaign, the networks’ hunger for interviews had her all over the morning and evening news broadcasts of every network — after her aides negotiated agreements limiting producers’ abilities to edit the interviews. This past weekend, she pulled off another rare feat — sitting for interviews with all the major Sunday talk shows. In most cases, the Sunday shows will reject guests who have appeared on competing shows.
Clinton’s team is also unusually aggressive in moving to smother potentially damaging storylines, as last spring when Wolfson and other aides took aim at an unflattering book by writers Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr.
GQ describes itself as “the definitive guide to fashion and grooming,” but also has a history of carrying groundbreaking reporting and long-form writing.
This presidential cycle, it has commissioned pieces from well-regarded Washington magazine writers on the presidential candidates, including a piece by Ryan Lizza, now of the New Yorker, on Barack Obama.
Green was not a particular favorite of the Clinton campaign, however. He took the assignment from GQ not long after finishing an unflattering 13,000-word profile in the November 2006 Atlantic Monthly, which concluded that the junior Senator from New York is, more or less, a timid, calculating pol.
“Today Clinton offers no big ideas, no crusading causes — by her own tacit admission, no evidence of bravery in the service of a larger ideal. Instead, her Senate record is an assemblage of many, many small gains.
Her real accomplishment in the Senate has been to rehabilitate the image and political career of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Impressive though that has been in its particulars, it makes for a rather thin claim on the presidency. Senator Clinton has plenty to talk about, but she doesn’t have much to say,” he wrote.
The next spring, according to people with the story and sources Green spoke to, he spent digging into the tensions within Hillary Clinton’s campaign — widely speculated about among reporters, but at the same time notoriously difficult to report from a political circle known for keeping internal disputes inside the family.
Podhoretz secretly urged Bush to bomb Iran
Clinton picks up backing of red-state Dem
In particular, a source familiar with Green’s story said, he had focused on internal criticism of the campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle.
Green had also asked questions about the pay package of the campaign’s communications director, Howard Wolfson, who is technically a consultant and left a lucrative communications practice in New York City to take the job, and whose compensation is the subject of speculation within the campaign. (Speculation about Wolfson’s compensation, sources said, was not in Green’s final GQ draft.)
Green approached the Clinton campaign to discuss the details of the story, which he described to Wolfson over dinner at a downtown Washington, D.C. restaurant, a source familiar with the conversations said.
Soon after that, Carson, who is now Hillary Clinton’s traveling press secretary, told GQ that the former president would not cooperate with Saunders’ planned profile if Green’s piece ran.
Green declined to comment on the fate of his story, referring questions to GQ and to Carson. Carson declined to comment on his discussions with GQ.
Green and GQ’s features editor, Joel Lovell, argued for rebuffing the Clinton campaigns demands, sources said, but Nelson made the final call to kill the story.
Saunders, the Syracuse novelist who is writing the Clinton story for GQ, declined to discuss his story, citing GQ policy.
He told the Syracuse Post-Standard in July that he was planning to travel with the former president to tour Clinton Foundation projects in Tanzania, Zambia, Malawi and South Africa and said he’d voted for Bill Clinton twice.
“It seems like [Clinton’s] gift, one of his gifts, is everybody likes him and knows him, so he can get people in a room and make things happen,” Saunders told the Syracuse paper. “I just like the idea that at this elderly stage of life, you can go and get your doors blown off.”
Asked by Politico if he was interested in hearing how his access to Clinton was procured, he demurred.
“I don’t think I want to know,” he said.
EDITOR'S NOTE: This story was updated to more accurately describe Sen. Barack Obama's brief spat with Fox News Channel.
Banks Agree To Participate In Test of Pandemic Outbreak of Bird Flu!
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8RS37700&show_article=1&catnum=4
Banks Agree To Participate In Test of Pandemic Outbreak of Bird Flu!
Sep 24 05:59 PM US/Eastern
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Don't be alarmed if your local bank teller is looking a bit sickly over the next three weeks. It is only a cyber-illness.
Hundreds of banks and other financial institutions are participating in the largest test of its kind ever conducted to ensure the nation's financial system can keep functioning in case of an outbreak of pandemic flu.
The test began Monday and is scheduled to run for three weeks. More than 2,700 financial institutions have signed up to participate, about five times the number the Treasury Department expected.
"This shows how much the business sector is focused on pandemic flu planning," Valerie Abend, Treasury's deputy assistant secretary for critical infrastructure protection, said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Treasury, aided by other federal agencies and the private sector, has devised a three-week script for how a serious outbreak of bird flu might affect operations at banks, from the very biggest to the smallest, as well as at credit unions, securities firms and insurance companies.
The exercise also covers companies that provide critical behind-the- scenes processing to keep the flow of checks and money circulating around the country.
According to the doomsday scenario devised by Treasury, a number of cases of bird flu in humans are reported overseas and the illness spreads quickly to the United States by people traveling on international flights.
From that beginning, the Treasury scenario presents financial institutions with a number of challenges over the course of the three- week exercise. The financial institutions got the first week's scenario over the weekend from an Internet site where the test is being conducted.
The whole exercise is part of a plan unveiled by President Bush in May 2006 directing various government agencies to upgrade their planning for pandemic outbreaks. The Government Accountability Office earlier this month criticized the administration for failing to conduct sufficient tests to make sure that the agencies understand their responsibilities.
One of the biggest challenges financial institutions will face is how to cope with absenteeism. In week one, the Treasury exercise directs the financial organizations to assume that 25 percent of their work force is not coming to work, either because of illness or because of fear of being infected or because they are staying home to take care of children who can't go to school because the schools have closed.
To decide who is absent, the Treasury directs the institutions to assume that everyone whose last name begins with certain letters, which could cover the bank president down to the local teller, cannot come to work. The 25 percent absentee rate will jump to 49 percent in week two.
Abend said the various projections were compiled with the help of government scientists. Government financial regulators also helped put together scenarios on how the stock market will behave as well as what the value of the dollar and various commodities such as oil will be doing.
The dollar is projected to rise as investors seek a safe haven with the spreading global illness while stock prices are projected to fall because of worries about what the pandemic will do to economic activity.
Absent employees won't be the only troubles facing the financial institutions. Under Treasury's scenario, they also will have to cope with shrinking Internet bandwidths as more and more people try to work from home. Cash withdrawals from ATM machines are expected to rise sharply and getting the machines refilled will present problems because of rising absentee rates at the armored car companies and the difficulty of getting fuel for the armored trucks as gasoline refineries curtail their production.
By the end of the three weeks, Abend said the government and the institutions participating will have a much better idea of just what a flu pandemic will mean in the United States. She said the test should get the institutions thinking about where they need to improve their contingency plans.
"What would you do if you don't have access to key people? Have you cross-trained enough employees to sufficiently cover that?" she asked. "We want to do a really robust test."
Of the more than 2,700 organizations participating, two-thirds are banks, 20 percent are securities firms and 10 percent are insurance companies. The size of the firms ranges from the very largest with more than 100,000 employees to small institutions with fewer than 250 employees.
After the three-week exercise is completed, Treasury plans to write a report detailing how institutions performed and where planning needs to be upgraded. The organizations will also be given the opportunity to make suggestions on any areas where they believe government regulations need to be amended to allow for a better response to a pandemic.
"The after-action report will allow institutions to benchmark their capabilities against other institutions," Abend said.
___
On the Net:
Treasury Department: http//http://www.ustreas.gov
Banks Agree To Participate In Test of Pandemic Outbreak of Bird Flu!
Sep 24 05:59 PM US/Eastern
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
AP Economics Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) - Don't be alarmed if your local bank teller is looking a bit sickly over the next three weeks. It is only a cyber-illness.
Hundreds of banks and other financial institutions are participating in the largest test of its kind ever conducted to ensure the nation's financial system can keep functioning in case of an outbreak of pandemic flu.
The test began Monday and is scheduled to run for three weeks. More than 2,700 financial institutions have signed up to participate, about five times the number the Treasury Department expected.
"This shows how much the business sector is focused on pandemic flu planning," Valerie Abend, Treasury's deputy assistant secretary for critical infrastructure protection, said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Treasury, aided by other federal agencies and the private sector, has devised a three-week script for how a serious outbreak of bird flu might affect operations at banks, from the very biggest to the smallest, as well as at credit unions, securities firms and insurance companies.
The exercise also covers companies that provide critical behind-the- scenes processing to keep the flow of checks and money circulating around the country.
According to the doomsday scenario devised by Treasury, a number of cases of bird flu in humans are reported overseas and the illness spreads quickly to the United States by people traveling on international flights.
From that beginning, the Treasury scenario presents financial institutions with a number of challenges over the course of the three- week exercise. The financial institutions got the first week's scenario over the weekend from an Internet site where the test is being conducted.
The whole exercise is part of a plan unveiled by President Bush in May 2006 directing various government agencies to upgrade their planning for pandemic outbreaks. The Government Accountability Office earlier this month criticized the administration for failing to conduct sufficient tests to make sure that the agencies understand their responsibilities.
One of the biggest challenges financial institutions will face is how to cope with absenteeism. In week one, the Treasury exercise directs the financial organizations to assume that 25 percent of their work force is not coming to work, either because of illness or because of fear of being infected or because they are staying home to take care of children who can't go to school because the schools have closed.
To decide who is absent, the Treasury directs the institutions to assume that everyone whose last name begins with certain letters, which could cover the bank president down to the local teller, cannot come to work. The 25 percent absentee rate will jump to 49 percent in week two.
Abend said the various projections were compiled with the help of government scientists. Government financial regulators also helped put together scenarios on how the stock market will behave as well as what the value of the dollar and various commodities such as oil will be doing.
The dollar is projected to rise as investors seek a safe haven with the spreading global illness while stock prices are projected to fall because of worries about what the pandemic will do to economic activity.
Absent employees won't be the only troubles facing the financial institutions. Under Treasury's scenario, they also will have to cope with shrinking Internet bandwidths as more and more people try to work from home. Cash withdrawals from ATM machines are expected to rise sharply and getting the machines refilled will present problems because of rising absentee rates at the armored car companies and the difficulty of getting fuel for the armored trucks as gasoline refineries curtail their production.
By the end of the three weeks, Abend said the government and the institutions participating will have a much better idea of just what a flu pandemic will mean in the United States. She said the test should get the institutions thinking about where they need to improve their contingency plans.
"What would you do if you don't have access to key people? Have you cross-trained enough employees to sufficiently cover that?" she asked. "We want to do a really robust test."
Of the more than 2,700 organizations participating, two-thirds are banks, 20 percent are securities firms and 10 percent are insurance companies. The size of the firms ranges from the very largest with more than 100,000 employees to small institutions with fewer than 250 employees.
After the three-week exercise is completed, Treasury plans to write a report detailing how institutions performed and where planning needs to be upgraded. The organizations will also be given the opportunity to make suggestions on any areas where they believe government regulations need to be amended to allow for a better response to a pandemic.
"The after-action report will allow institutions to benchmark their capabilities against other institutions," Abend said.
___
On the Net:
Treasury Department: http//http://www.ustreas.gov
Congress debate begins on North America Union
Congress debate begins on North America Union
Resolution calls for end of NAFTA superhighway, abandonment of integration with Canada, Mexico
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 25, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va. (Photo: University of Virginia)
A House resolution urging President Bush "not to go forward with the North American Union or the NAFTA Superhighway system" is – according to its sponsor Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va., in an exclusive WND interview – "also a message to both the executive branch and the legislative branch."
As WND previously reported, on Jan. 22 Goode introduced H.C.R. 40, titled "Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States should not engage in the construction of a North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) Superhighway System or enter into a North American Union with Mexico and Canada."
The bill has been referred to the House Subcommittee on Highways and Transit of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
WND asked Goode if the president was risking electoral success for the Republican Party in 2008 with his insistence on pushing for North American integration via the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America, or SPP.
"Yes," Goode answered. "You won't hear the leadership in the Republic Party admit it, but there are many in the House and Senate who know that illegal immigration has to be stopped and legal immigration has to be reduced. We are giving away the country so a few very rich people can get richer."
How did he react when President Bush referred to those who suggest the SPP could turn into the North American Union as "conspiracy theorists"?
"The president is really engaging in a play on words," Goode responded. "The secretary of transportation came before our subcommittee," he explained, "and I had the opportunity to ask her some questions about the NAFTA Superhighway. Of course, she answered, 'There's no NAFTA Superhighway.' But then Mary Peters proceeded to discuss the road system that would come up from Mexico and go through the United States up into Canada."
Goode is a member of the Subcommittee on Transportation, Treasury, Housing and Urban Development of the House Committee on Appropriations.
"So, I think that saying we're 'conspiracy theorists' or something like that is really just a play on words with the intent to demonize the opposition," Goode concluded.
Goode stressed that the Bush administration supports both a NAU regional government and a NAFTA Superhighway system: "The Bush administration as well as Mexico and Canada have persons in the government in all three countries who want to a see a North American Union as well as a highway system that would bring goods into the west coast of Mexico and transport them up through Mexico into the United States and then in onto Canada," Goode confirmed.
The Virginia congressman said he believes the motivation behind the movement toward North American integration is the anticipated profits the large multinational corporations in each of the three countries expect to make from global trade, especially moving production to China.
"Some really large businesses that get a lot from China would like a NAFTA Superhighway system because it would reduce costs for them to transport containers from China and, as a result, increase their margins," he argued.
"I am vigorously opposed to the Mexican trucks coming into the country," Goode continued. "The way we have done it and, I think, the way we should do it in the future, is to have the goods come into the United States from Mexico within a 20-mile commercial space and unloaded from Mexican trucks into U.S. trucks. This procedure enhances the safety of the country, the security of the country, and provides much less chance for illegal immigration."
As WND reported, the Department of Transportation has begun a Mexican truck "demonstration project" under which 100 Mexican trucking companies are being allowed to run their long-haul rigs throughout the U.S.
Previously, Mexican trucks have been limited to a 20-mile commercial zone in the United States, with the requirement that goods bound for locations in the U.S. beyond the 20-mile commercial zone be off-loaded to U.S. trucks.
WND reported last month that Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., successfully offered an amendment to the Department of Transportation Fiscal Year 2008 appropriations bill to block DOT from spending any federal funds to implement the truck project.
Dorgan’s amendment passed 75-23, after Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., changed her vote to support Dorgan.
By a voice vote, the House passed an amendment offered by Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., to the DOT appropriations bill comparable to Dorgan's, designed to block the agency from using federal funds to implement the truck project.
DeFazio chairs the House transportation subcommittee that oversees motor carriers.
"With the Trans-Texas Corridor, which I would say is part of the NAFTA Superhighway system, and with this NAFTA plot with the Mexican trucks just coming in and not loading off to U.S. trucks, they will just drive right over the Rio Grande and come on over into Texas," Goode argued. "A lot of these Mexican trucks will be bring containerized cargo from the west coast of Mexico where they will be unloaded in Mexican ports to avoid the fees and costs of unloading at U.S. ports."
"So, when you look at the total package," he continued, "we do have a NAFTA Superhighway system already in place. There are those in all three countries that believe we should have a North American Union and the Security and Prosperity Partnership, in my opinion takes us down that road. And I am vigorously opposed to the loss of our sovereignty."
Why, WND asked, do so many congressmen and senators insist on writing and telling their constituents that they don't know anything about the Security and Prosperity Partnership, or that SPP working groups are really just to increase our competitiveness?
"In the House, a strong majority voted to provide no money in the transportation funding bill," Goode responded. "I commend Congressman Duncan Hunter for submitting an amendment to the Department of Transportation funding bill [which] got over 360 votes that said no funds in the transportation appropriation measure, prohibiting Department of Transportation funds from being used to participate on working groups that promote the Security and Prosperity Partnership."
As WND reported, Hunter's amendment to the FY 2008 Department of Transportation funding bill prohibiting DOT from using federal funds to participate in SPP working groups creating NAFTA Superhighways passed 362 to 63, with strong bipartisan support. The House approved H.R. 3074 by 268-153, with the Hunter amendment included.
"So, I think a majority the House, if you had an up or down vote on the SPP, would vote down on the SPP," Goode concluded. "But some still say, and it's a play on words, that we don't have a Security and Prosperity Partnership that will lead to a North American Union. I don't think they can say anymore that we don't have a Security and Prosperity Partnership arrangement between the U.S., Mexico, and Canada, because that was done in Waco, Texas, on March 23, 2005, and the recent meeting at Montebello was to talk about it further."
WND asked Goode to comment on the North American Competitiveness Council, or NACC, a group of multinational corporations selected by the Chambers of Commerce in Mexico, Canada and the U.S. as the central adviser of SPP working groups.
At the SPP summit in Montebello, Quebec, the NACC met behind closed doors with the three leaders, cabinet secretaries who were present, and top SPP working group bureaucrats, while various public advocacy groups, environmental groups, labor unions – and the press – were excluded.
Should SPP working group meetings be open to the public?
"I wish they were," Goode responded. "If it is as the Bush administration says, 'We're not planning any North American Union,' then why wouldn’t those meetings be open, why wouldn’t you let the media in?" Goode asked.
"But some of the very big corporations want the goods from China to come in here unchecked," he continued. "It costs money for U.S. trucks to transport Chinese goods from West Coast ports like Los Angeles or Long Beach. But if you can have a Mexican truck and Mexican truck driver, that's going to be cheaper. And it's all about the margins. The margins relate directly to how much money the multi-national corporations are going to make."
Has the Senate debate on the Dorgan amendment brought the issues of the NAU and NAFTA Superhighways more to the attention of the Senate?
"I think so," Goode said. "That debate had a very positive effect. You had grassroots support calling the Senate on the Dorgan amendment.
"The Bush administration engages in the same play of words with all these issues," Goode added. "Take a look at the Kennedy-McCain comprehensive immigration reform, which the Bush administration has now tried to jam through the Senate not once, but twice.
"The Bush administration claims it's not [amnesty] when you let someone stay in the country and give them a path to citizenship," Goode pointed out. "Well, that's their definition, not my definition, and not the definition of the majority of the public. The majority of the public called in and buried the amnesty bill because of public pressure. Public pressure also got de-funded the pilot program on Mexican trucks in this country."
So should the U.S. pull out of the SPP?
"Yes," Goode answered, "but the best way to end SPP would be to have a chief executive that wouldn't do anything with it."
What does Goode think of the state legislatures that are passing anti-NAU, anti-NAFTA Superhighway and anti-SPP resolutions?
"If enough state legislatures pass resolutions like that, it surely should have an impact on the House and the Senate," Goode said.
"President Bush's position is that we need to carry out NAFTA and we need to have this free flow of goods with Mexico and Canada," Goode explained. "Well, Bush's approach involves a derogation of our sovereignty and it also undermines the security and the safety of the country.
"It will be much easier for a truck to get a container on the west coast of Mexico and haul in a biological or radiological or nuclear weapon than it would be if you are going to have to unload the trucks on the Texas-Mexico border and put the goods and material in a U.S. truck," he continued.
"The problem is that the NAU, NAFTA Superhighways and SPP all go back to money," Goode stressed. "The multinational companies want their goods from Mexico and China because they want the cheap labor."
What about the U.S.'s large and growing trade imbalance with China?
"I don't want to have to be an 'I told you so' person," Goode answered, "but I was a vigorous opponent of PNTR ("permanent normal trade relations") and before that of 'most favored nation' trade status with China. We need tariffs and quotas with China. Personally, if I know food is coming in from China, I won't buy it. The American people with the adoption of COOL, country of origin labeling, with the food clearly labeled, I think you will see the American public will shy away from Chinese products."
In 2000, Congress voted to extend to China PNTR. "Most favored nation" or MFN trade status, was given to China first in 1980 by the Carter administration. COOL rules are administered by the Department of Agriculture.
Goode concluded the interview by thanking WND for covering the SPP, NAU and NAFTA Superhighway issues: "I want to thank you for putting these issues out where people can read it," Goode said. "You have enlightened hundreds of thousands if not millions of American citizens who otherwise would have been greatly in the dark on the SPP."
Secret confab teaches officials to sell foreigners U.S. assets
Secret confab teaches officials to sell foreigners U.S. assets
Carlyle executive among moderators of conference that barred WND reporter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 24, 2007
8:27 p.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
A top Carlyle Group executive is leading a panel tomorrow at a conference to teach government officials in the U.S. how to lease public assets to foreign groups – an event that barred WND.
Barry Gold, managing director in charge of infrastructure investment, will be at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City to lead a session at the "North American PPP & Infrastructure Finance Conference."
The government of Abu Dhabi has made an investment in the Carlyle Group, a Washington-based private investment firm with close ties to former President George H. W. Bush and his family and top officials in the Reagan and Clinton administrations.
Organizers say the conference's aim is to teach state and local government officials in the U.S. how to lease a wide range of public assets to international and foreign private investment groups.
WND reported last week, EuroMoney closed the conference, refusing to accept from WND the $1,999 registration fee because WND was "too political" to attend.
Gold is heading a panel on how institutional investors are approaching PPP structures in which state departments of transportation can lease current toll roads or develop a new generation financed and operated largely by foreign investment consortiums for decades after the roads are completed.
Last week Mubadala, a wholly owned investment arm of the Abu Dhabi government, purchased a 7.5 percent share of the Carlyle Group, permitting the Arab emirate's government to own or receive fees as a minority shareholder on PPP toll road infrastructure projects the Carlyle Group structures or finances.
With this equity structure, state departments of transportation that contract PPP toll road projects with or through the Carlyle Group may end up with UAE ownership of the operating leases. The roads could operate under that arrangement for decades without residents of the state being aware of Abu Dhabi ownership.
The following state department of transportation participants are listed on the EuroMoney seminar brochure:
Kenneth Newman, chief financial officer, Wisconsin DOT
Barbara Reese, deputy secretary of transportation, Virginia
James Bass, chief financial officer, Texas DOT
Cedric Grant, assistant secretary, Louisiana DOT
Peggy Catlin, deputy executive director, Colorado DOT
Kathy English, chief financial officer, Delaware DOT
Emeka Moneme, director, Washington, D.C., DOT
Virginia, Texas, Louisiana, Colorado and Delaware are listed on the Federal Highway Administration website as being among the 21 states that have enacted PPP-enabling legislation for highway projects, containing the 28 key elements the FHWA recommends be enacted into state law.
The Carlyle Group website credits Gold with leading PPP financing for the Chicago Skyway, Autopista Central in Chile, Highway 407 in Toronto, California State Route 91 and the Santiago Airport.
The Carlyle Group website documents Gold's extensive international experience with infrastructure financing. At Airport Group International, a global airport development company, he was responsible for the Bolivian Airports concession and an Australian investment, operating agreement and financing. At Lehman Brothers, he worked on the Budapest Airport advisory and financing and the MC Cuernavaca Toll Road in Mexico.
Carlyle executive among moderators of conference that barred WND reporter
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 24, 2007
8:27 p.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
A top Carlyle Group executive is leading a panel tomorrow at a conference to teach government officials in the U.S. how to lease public assets to foreign groups – an event that barred WND.
Barry Gold, managing director in charge of infrastructure investment, will be at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City to lead a session at the "North American PPP & Infrastructure Finance Conference."
The government of Abu Dhabi has made an investment in the Carlyle Group, a Washington-based private investment firm with close ties to former President George H. W. Bush and his family and top officials in the Reagan and Clinton administrations.
Organizers say the conference's aim is to teach state and local government officials in the U.S. how to lease a wide range of public assets to international and foreign private investment groups.
WND reported last week, EuroMoney closed the conference, refusing to accept from WND the $1,999 registration fee because WND was "too political" to attend.
Gold is heading a panel on how institutional investors are approaching PPP structures in which state departments of transportation can lease current toll roads or develop a new generation financed and operated largely by foreign investment consortiums for decades after the roads are completed.
Last week Mubadala, a wholly owned investment arm of the Abu Dhabi government, purchased a 7.5 percent share of the Carlyle Group, permitting the Arab emirate's government to own or receive fees as a minority shareholder on PPP toll road infrastructure projects the Carlyle Group structures or finances.
With this equity structure, state departments of transportation that contract PPP toll road projects with or through the Carlyle Group may end up with UAE ownership of the operating leases. The roads could operate under that arrangement for decades without residents of the state being aware of Abu Dhabi ownership.
The following state department of transportation participants are listed on the EuroMoney seminar brochure:
Kenneth Newman, chief financial officer, Wisconsin DOT
Barbara Reese, deputy secretary of transportation, Virginia
James Bass, chief financial officer, Texas DOT
Cedric Grant, assistant secretary, Louisiana DOT
Peggy Catlin, deputy executive director, Colorado DOT
Kathy English, chief financial officer, Delaware DOT
Emeka Moneme, director, Washington, D.C., DOT
Virginia, Texas, Louisiana, Colorado and Delaware are listed on the Federal Highway Administration website as being among the 21 states that have enacted PPP-enabling legislation for highway projects, containing the 28 key elements the FHWA recommends be enacted into state law.
The Carlyle Group website credits Gold with leading PPP financing for the Chicago Skyway, Autopista Central in Chile, Highway 407 in Toronto, California State Route 91 and the Santiago Airport.
The Carlyle Group website documents Gold's extensive international experience with infrastructure financing. At Airport Group International, a global airport development company, he was responsible for the Bolivian Airports concession and an Australian investment, operating agreement and financing. At Lehman Brothers, he worked on the Budapest Airport advisory and financing and the MC Cuernavaca Toll Road in Mexico.
France Races to Oust Illegal Immigrants
France Races to Oust Illegal Immigrants
By ELAINE GANLEY – 3 days ago
(AP Photo/Jacques Brinon)
PARIS (AP) — A Russian boy suffers head injuries after falling from a window while trying to elude police. A North African man slips from a window ledge and fractures his leg while fleeing officers. A Chinese woman lies in a coma after plunging from a window during a police check.
As France races to deport 25,000 illegal immigrants by the end of the year — a quota set by President Nicolas Sarkozy — tensions are mounting and the crackdown is taking a toll.
Critics say the hunt threatens values in a nation that prides itself on being a cradle of human rights and a land of asylum. Protesters have gathered by the dozens in Paris to protect illegal aliens as police move in.
But with three months left in the year, police have caught at least 11,800 immigrants, less than half the target, so Sarkozy has ordered officials to pick up the pace.
"I want numbers," Sarkozy reportedly told Brice Hortefeux, head of the Ministry of Immigration, Integration, National Identity and Co-Development, which Sarkozy set up after taking office in May. "This is a campaign commitment. The French expect (action) on this."
There are no solid estimates of the number of illegal aliens in France. The Immigration Ministry puts it at 200,000 to 400,000, many from former colonies in Africa. France has a population of some 63 million.
The president, who cultivated a tough-on-crime image while serving as Interior Minister, says France needs a new kind of immigrant — one who is "selected, not endured."
His government is fast-tracking tighter immigration legislation. Parliament's lower house on Thursday approved a bill that would allow consular officers to request DNA samples from immigrants trying to join relatives in France. Even some Cabinet ministers dislike the measure, which critics say betrays France's humanitarian values.
The DNA tests would be voluntary and proponents say such testing, which would get a trial run until 2010, would speed visa processing and give immigrants a way to bolster their applications.
Immigration legislation under consideration also aims to ensure that immigrants joining family members here speak French and grasp French values — to be proven with tests.
In a nationally televized interview Thursday, Sarkozy went further, saying he wants France to adopt immigration quotas by regions of the world and by occupation.
"I want us to be able to establish each year, after a debate in parliament, a quota with a ceiling for the number of foreigners we accept on our territory," he said.
European countries to the south, like Italy or Spain, face a greater challenge from illegal immigration than France — but neither has set themselves targets for throwing aliens out.
In the Netherlands, the first act of the new parliament elected in November 2006 was to halt deportations set in motion by the previous government.
Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende's new government declared an amnesty for up to 30,000 people. New asylum seekers and illegal immigrants still face a tough regime, kept in camps while their cases are handled. Even legal immigrants must pass language tests before coming and take citizenship classes in order to remain.
Meanwhile, resistance to France's crackdown has built among human rights groups, politicians of the opposition left, and even police. Injuries of foreigners during the past two months have also mobilized critics.
The 12-year-old Russian boy, who was fleeing with his illegal alien father in the northern town of Amiens, has been hospitalized with serious head injuries since early August. The North African man in the southern town of Roussillon suffered double fractures to his leg. The Chinese woman fell from an apartment in Paris on Thursday when police investigating a theft complaint turned up to carry out a check.
"Neighborhood groups are forming," said Pierre Willem of the UNSA police union. "Reactions are becoming more and more violent."
Some police officers worry they will get caught in the numbers hunt — accused of racism for making arrests on the basis of skin color or other illegal criteria.
Even unions representing Air France employees are protesting, saying the flagship carrier's image is suffering because the government uses it to return illegal aliens, sometimes bound hand and foot, on flights occasionally marked by violent incidents.
"It's not our mission to be police auxiliaries," said Leon Cremieux, a national secretary of Sud Aerien, a small union representing employees of the aviation industry. Conditions during some expulsions are "contrary to human rights."
Socialist lawmaker Michele Delaunay, of Bordeaux, recently became a symbolic sponsor of a Kurd of Turkish nationality who had been ordered to leave France, stalling the expulsion process.
"It's a way to show the public that these problems of expulsion are, above all, human problems and not numbers," Delaunay said, adding that the young man speaks French, worked and paid taxes, making his case "particularly legitimate."
She nevertheless received an official warning that citizens who help illegal aliens stay in France risk a five-year prison term.
Friday, September 21, 2007
Abu Dhabi takes ownership stake in Carlyle Group
Abu Dhabi takes ownership stake in Carlyle Group
United Arab Emirate investment ties with Bush family deepen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 21, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
The Financial Times announced last night the Government of Abu Dhabi has made an investment in the Carlyle Group, a Washington-based private investment firm with close ties to former President George H. W. Bush and his family, as well as to top government officials in the administrations of President Reagan and President Clinton.
Mubadala, a wholly owned investment arm of the Abu Dhabi government, bought a 7.5 percent share of the Carlyle Group in a transaction where the deal price was struck at a 10 percent discount to a valuation of $20 billion for all of the Carlyle Group.
Abu Dhabi is the largest of the seven emirates of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the capital of the United Arab Emirates.
Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan of the Abu Dhabi ruling family is the chairman of Mubadala.
WND has previously reported Dubai International Capital, a private equity investment capital firm that is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubai Holdings, has commonly participated in co-investments with the Carlyle Group.
Dubai, like Abu Dhabi, is one of the seven emirates that form the UAE.
WND reported yesterday, Dubai, in a complex set of transactions, is moving to acquire 19.9 percent of the Nasdaq stock market in New York, in the first equity transaction which would place a Middle Eastern government in an ownership position in a key U.S. stock exchange.
As a result of the transaction, Dubai will also acquire 28 percent of the London Stock exchange, one of the oldest and largest stock exchanges in the world.
The transaction is being made through Borse Dubai, a holding company 100 percent owned by the government of the Emirate of Dubai and controlled by Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the head of the Dubai ruling family.
United Arab Emirate investment ties with Bush family deepen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 21, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
The Financial Times announced last night the Government of Abu Dhabi has made an investment in the Carlyle Group, a Washington-based private investment firm with close ties to former President George H. W. Bush and his family, as well as to top government officials in the administrations of President Reagan and President Clinton.
Mubadala, a wholly owned investment arm of the Abu Dhabi government, bought a 7.5 percent share of the Carlyle Group in a transaction where the deal price was struck at a 10 percent discount to a valuation of $20 billion for all of the Carlyle Group.
Abu Dhabi is the largest of the seven emirates of the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the capital of the United Arab Emirates.
Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed Bin Zayed Al Nahyan of the Abu Dhabi ruling family is the chairman of Mubadala.
WND has previously reported Dubai International Capital, a private equity investment capital firm that is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubai Holdings, has commonly participated in co-investments with the Carlyle Group.
Dubai, like Abu Dhabi, is one of the seven emirates that form the UAE.
WND reported yesterday, Dubai, in a complex set of transactions, is moving to acquire 19.9 percent of the Nasdaq stock market in New York, in the first equity transaction which would place a Middle Eastern government in an ownership position in a key U.S. stock exchange.
As a result of the transaction, Dubai will also acquire 28 percent of the London Stock exchange, one of the oldest and largest stock exchanges in the world.
The transaction is being made through Borse Dubai, a holding company 100 percent owned by the government of the Emirate of Dubai and controlled by Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, the head of the Dubai ruling family.
Arlington Condemns Region's Immigrant Crackdown
Arlington Condemns Region's Immigrant Crackdown
By Kirstin Downey
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 19, 2007; Page B04
The Arlington County Board yesterday strongly rebuked elected officials elsewhere in Northern Virginia who are clamping down on illegal immigrants, saying such efforts are "politically inspired," "irresponsible" and "punitive."
The five board members, all Democrats, unanimously backed a resolution calling on elected officials elsewhere to "promote the integration of immigrants" instead of enacting rules they said would be divisive.
"I was never more proud to be an Arlingtonian than I am today," said board member J. Walter Tejada. (Larry Morris - Twp)
They said the county will continue to prosecute illegal immigrants who commit crimes and report them to federal officials, but in a way that treats "all of its residents . . . with human dignity and respect."
The Arlington officials said the county will take no actions that might discourage immigrants from reporting crimes to the police, such as requiring officers to check the immigration status of every person with whom they come into contact. They also said the county will not cut public health services for immigrants, which officials said could cause disease to spread. They said they will not restrict education programs because children of illegal immigrants are likely to remain in the United States and it therefore makes better sense to help them be able to earn a good living.
"We will not engage in divisive tactics," said the board's vice chairman, J. Walter Tejada, a naturalized citizen who was born in El Salvador. "I was never more proud to be an Arlingtonian than I am today."
The regionwide debate over illegal immigration came to Arlington early this month. At a Saturday board meeting, local Republican officials posed pointed questions to the board about the extent of crime being committed by illegal immigrants and whether officials were requiring the police to report such crime to federal immigration officials. They also questioned whether it is appropriate for Arlington's day-laborer center to serve workers who are in the country illegally.
Board members responded by saying that the county's crime rate has reached a record low even as the community has become more diverse.
In some areas, politicians have been swept to victory by attacking their opponents as lenient toward illegal immigrants in giving them health services, education or employment assistance. In Herndon, for example, supporters of a day-laborer center were defeated last year, and the center was shut down last week.
In Prince William County, a proposed police policy would require officers to check the immigration status of anyone arrested for traffic violations, shoplifting or other misdemeanors. Manassas Park recently canceled a Latino festival that had cost $30,000, some of which had come from city money.
After many years in which relaxed immigration policies were favored by Republicans and Democrats, taking a stand in favor of immigrants now requires some political courage. Tejada is facing reelection, and Paul Ferguson, the board's chairman, is hoping to be elected clerk of the court. Both have challengers in the Nov. 6 election.
Arlington officials criticized the federal government yesterday for what they called its failure to enact fair immigration laws and enforce them appropriately, saying government incompetence on that front has thrown the issue into the laps of local governments.
The federal government "has been incredibly inefficient in border security," said board member Jay Fisette (D), and the result is that "many ills in the community" are being blamed on immigrants.
Only a few people were in the audience to hear the board members' resolution, and most of them applauded.
Among the supporters was Enrique Escorza, the consul general of the Mexican Embassy, who was sitting near the front of the room.
"The signal we are receiving here is very important," Escorza said. "Listening to a very responsive county board like Arlington is very gratifying."
WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING!:
A council Laraza ("we are the only race") staffer wrote: "The Republicans tried to make illegal immigration their big issue last year and what happened?"
What happened? The issue festered and thosuands more illegals aliens snuck across the broder, moved to NoVA, raped and killed Americans, and citizen crime rates rose and citizen taxes rose to cover the costs of services and benfits to illegals. And still the Dems did nothing!
I and many friends and family members voted for Kaine last election but never again for any candidate who refuses to crack down on these Salvadorans and Mexicans without borders, the LaRaza facists!
Update: In Fairfax, there may actually be one or two Dem candidates for district supervisor willing to take action against illegal immigrants, action that the incumbent Republican supervisors have not taken. Intel is being gathered district by district across by network members, the same network that has boycotted Arlington businesses for 4 months now because of Tejada. Stay tuned for Fairfax district supervisor voting advisories.
But, in Arlington, if you vote for the likes of Tejada, you are voting for the criminal El Salvador conquest of NoVa.
I hope that all of these illegal immigrants are reading this article and move from Manassas to Arlington! Let's see what their stance is when they ruin that community like they have in Manassas. I bet they will be singing a different tune when the citizens of Arlington can't get timely medical treatment when they have to stand in live at the emergency room for over an hour behind SEVERAL illegal immigrants who treat the ER like a personal doctor's office. Let's see what happens when the non-english speaking children invade thier schools and bleed thier economy dry. Better Arlington than Manassas, as far as I'm concerned. This whole topic just sickens me. I don't get what part of "illegal" that these people don't inderstand. How do you say "illegal" in Spanish? Be careful what you wish for Arlington...
By Kirstin Downey
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, September 19, 2007; Page B04
The Arlington County Board yesterday strongly rebuked elected officials elsewhere in Northern Virginia who are clamping down on illegal immigrants, saying such efforts are "politically inspired," "irresponsible" and "punitive."
The five board members, all Democrats, unanimously backed a resolution calling on elected officials elsewhere to "promote the integration of immigrants" instead of enacting rules they said would be divisive.
"I was never more proud to be an Arlingtonian than I am today," said board member J. Walter Tejada. (Larry Morris - Twp)
They said the county will continue to prosecute illegal immigrants who commit crimes and report them to federal officials, but in a way that treats "all of its residents . . . with human dignity and respect."
The Arlington officials said the county will take no actions that might discourage immigrants from reporting crimes to the police, such as requiring officers to check the immigration status of every person with whom they come into contact. They also said the county will not cut public health services for immigrants, which officials said could cause disease to spread. They said they will not restrict education programs because children of illegal immigrants are likely to remain in the United States and it therefore makes better sense to help them be able to earn a good living.
"We will not engage in divisive tactics," said the board's vice chairman, J. Walter Tejada, a naturalized citizen who was born in El Salvador. "I was never more proud to be an Arlingtonian than I am today."
The regionwide debate over illegal immigration came to Arlington early this month. At a Saturday board meeting, local Republican officials posed pointed questions to the board about the extent of crime being committed by illegal immigrants and whether officials were requiring the police to report such crime to federal immigration officials. They also questioned whether it is appropriate for Arlington's day-laborer center to serve workers who are in the country illegally.
Board members responded by saying that the county's crime rate has reached a record low even as the community has become more diverse.
In some areas, politicians have been swept to victory by attacking their opponents as lenient toward illegal immigrants in giving them health services, education or employment assistance. In Herndon, for example, supporters of a day-laborer center were defeated last year, and the center was shut down last week.
In Prince William County, a proposed police policy would require officers to check the immigration status of anyone arrested for traffic violations, shoplifting or other misdemeanors. Manassas Park recently canceled a Latino festival that had cost $30,000, some of which had come from city money.
After many years in which relaxed immigration policies were favored by Republicans and Democrats, taking a stand in favor of immigrants now requires some political courage. Tejada is facing reelection, and Paul Ferguson, the board's chairman, is hoping to be elected clerk of the court. Both have challengers in the Nov. 6 election.
Arlington officials criticized the federal government yesterday for what they called its failure to enact fair immigration laws and enforce them appropriately, saying government incompetence on that front has thrown the issue into the laps of local governments.
The federal government "has been incredibly inefficient in border security," said board member Jay Fisette (D), and the result is that "many ills in the community" are being blamed on immigrants.
Only a few people were in the audience to hear the board members' resolution, and most of them applauded.
Among the supporters was Enrique Escorza, the consul general of the Mexican Embassy, who was sitting near the front of the room.
"The signal we are receiving here is very important," Escorza said. "Listening to a very responsive county board like Arlington is very gratifying."
WHAT OTHERS ARE SAYING!:
A council Laraza ("we are the only race") staffer wrote: "The Republicans tried to make illegal immigration their big issue last year and what happened?"
What happened? The issue festered and thosuands more illegals aliens snuck across the broder, moved to NoVA, raped and killed Americans, and citizen crime rates rose and citizen taxes rose to cover the costs of services and benfits to illegals. And still the Dems did nothing!
I and many friends and family members voted for Kaine last election but never again for any candidate who refuses to crack down on these Salvadorans and Mexicans without borders, the LaRaza facists!
Update: In Fairfax, there may actually be one or two Dem candidates for district supervisor willing to take action against illegal immigrants, action that the incumbent Republican supervisors have not taken. Intel is being gathered district by district across by network members, the same network that has boycotted Arlington businesses for 4 months now because of Tejada. Stay tuned for Fairfax district supervisor voting advisories.
But, in Arlington, if you vote for the likes of Tejada, you are voting for the criminal El Salvador conquest of NoVa.
I hope that all of these illegal immigrants are reading this article and move from Manassas to Arlington! Let's see what their stance is when they ruin that community like they have in Manassas. I bet they will be singing a different tune when the citizens of Arlington can't get timely medical treatment when they have to stand in live at the emergency room for over an hour behind SEVERAL illegal immigrants who treat the ER like a personal doctor's office. Let's see what happens when the non-english speaking children invade thier schools and bleed thier economy dry. Better Arlington than Manassas, as far as I'm concerned. This whole topic just sickens me. I don't get what part of "illegal" that these people don't inderstand. How do you say "illegal" in Spanish? Be careful what you wish for Arlington...
Plenty of hurdles ahead for immigration bill
Plenty of hurdles ahead for immigration bill
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Though the Senate voted Tuesday to bring President Bush's immigration reform bill back to the Senate floor, objections to any of two dozen amendments to be debated starting Wednesday could kill the bill for the year.
And even as the Senate moved forward, House Republicans late Tuesday voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution opposing the immigration bill -- a move that could place a significant roadblock in front of the measure even if it clears the Senate.
By a vote of 114-23, the House Republican Conference approved a statement by Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan that simply read: "Resolved: The House GOP Conference disapproves of the Senate immigration bill." The vote came during a closed-door meeting.
The lack of Republican support could doom the immigration bill because House Democratic leaders have previously said they would not bring it to the House floor unless at least 70 of the 201 GOP members were on board.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said, "It's clear that there is a large number of House Republicans who have serious concerns with the Senate bill."
Earlier in the Senate, proponents of the bill received four more than the 60 votes necessary to send the legislation to the floor for debate after several pleas from Bush over the last two weeks, including a rare trip to Capitol Hill to twist a few arms and a final speech Tuesday morning.
"I view this as a historic opportunity for Congress to act," Bush told an audience of supporters at the Eisenhower office building. "This is a moment for people who have been elected to come together, focus on a problem and show the American people we can fix a problem."
The bill includes $4.4 billion for border protection, work-site enforcement and tamper-proof ID cards; sets up a temporary worker program to address the needs of employers who rely on migrants; and requires that migrants learn English. It also offers a path to citizenship to the estimated 12 million people in the United States illegally.
One of the bill's architects, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, called Tuesday's vote "a major step forward for our national security, for our economy, and for our humanity."
"We did the right thing today because we know the American people sent us here to act on our most urgent problems. We know they will not stand for small political factions getting in the way," Kennedy said in a statement.
A similar test vote earlier this month received only 45 votes, and only nine of them from Republicans. On Tuesday, 24 Republicans joined 39 Democrats and independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman to proceed with debate.
Bush said that Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff will work with senators to reach a compromise.
"We are certainly pleased with the early vote on the motion to proceed," White House spokesman Tony Snow told reporters shortly after the Senate decision. He said he looks forward to the debates.
Opponents of the bill say that the path to citizenship amounts to amnesty for those who entered the country illegally. The 24 amendments to be considered -- 12 for Democrats and 12 for Republicans, seek to change some of the more controversial parts of the legislation.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, one of the bill's more vocal opponents said he is still concerned about enforcing tougher laws.
"My concern is the gulf between the promise being made to the American people and the likelihood that the promise will be carried out," Cornyn said before the vote. "The White House said this is of no concern because they will declare them ineligible and deport them.
"The question Americans are asking is, 'Will they? Can they,' " Cornyn said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said the Senate had to address the issue.
"The stakes are too high for inaction," Reid said. "We are the Senate of the United States. People said, 'The issue is too complex, let's not do it.' We have to take hard votes.
"Mr. President, we have an immigration system that is broken and needs to be fixed. That's what we're trying to do is fix this," Reid said.
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Monday showed 47 percent of Americans opposed the bill, while 30 percent supported it and 19 percent said they didn't know enough about it to make a judgment. The poll's sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
However, the poll found a significant division among opponents of the immigration plan. About 28 percent said they were opposed because it did too much to help illegal immigrants, but 15 percent said they were opposed because it did too little.
So while much of the opposition to the bill has come from those who believe it is too soft on illegal immigration, the poll found that 45 percent of Americans either support the bill or want it to be more immigrant-friendly, compared to 28 percent who feel it's already too immigrant-friendly.
CNN's Dana Bash and Evan Glass contributed to this report.
Some major amendments to be considered before a final vote:
• Crack down on people who remain after expiration of their visas, require that all illegal immigrant heads of household seeking lawful status return home as long as they meet a certain wealth threshold -- offered by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, Jon Kyl, R-Arizona, and Mel Martinez, R-Florida.
• Limit legalization to unlawful immigrants who have been in the country four years or more, by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia.
• Require all illegal immigrant heads of household to return home within two years, before gaining any kind of lawful status, offered by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.
• Award more points in the merit-based green card allocation system for family ties to U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey.
• Replace the worker identification program, narrowing the group of employees who businesses would have to check, by Sens. Max Baucus, D-Montana, Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois.
• Deny illegal immigrants the chance to get green cards, by Sen. Kit Bond, R-Missouri.
--Associated Press
_________________________________________________________________
Why is it Mr. President that you insist on fixing a problem with a solution a majority of American don't want? Seems to me, El Senior Presidente that you have your priorities all screwed up!
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Though the Senate voted Tuesday to bring President Bush's immigration reform bill back to the Senate floor, objections to any of two dozen amendments to be debated starting Wednesday could kill the bill for the year.
And even as the Senate moved forward, House Republicans late Tuesday voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution opposing the immigration bill -- a move that could place a significant roadblock in front of the measure even if it clears the Senate.
By a vote of 114-23, the House Republican Conference approved a statement by Rep. Pete Hoekstra of Michigan that simply read: "Resolved: The House GOP Conference disapproves of the Senate immigration bill." The vote came during a closed-door meeting.
The lack of Republican support could doom the immigration bill because House Democratic leaders have previously said they would not bring it to the House floor unless at least 70 of the 201 GOP members were on board.
House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said, "It's clear that there is a large number of House Republicans who have serious concerns with the Senate bill."
Earlier in the Senate, proponents of the bill received four more than the 60 votes necessary to send the legislation to the floor for debate after several pleas from Bush over the last two weeks, including a rare trip to Capitol Hill to twist a few arms and a final speech Tuesday morning.
"I view this as a historic opportunity for Congress to act," Bush told an audience of supporters at the Eisenhower office building. "This is a moment for people who have been elected to come together, focus on a problem and show the American people we can fix a problem."
The bill includes $4.4 billion for border protection, work-site enforcement and tamper-proof ID cards; sets up a temporary worker program to address the needs of employers who rely on migrants; and requires that migrants learn English. It also offers a path to citizenship to the estimated 12 million people in the United States illegally.
One of the bill's architects, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Massachusetts, called Tuesday's vote "a major step forward for our national security, for our economy, and for our humanity."
"We did the right thing today because we know the American people sent us here to act on our most urgent problems. We know they will not stand for small political factions getting in the way," Kennedy said in a statement.
A similar test vote earlier this month received only 45 votes, and only nine of them from Republicans. On Tuesday, 24 Republicans joined 39 Democrats and independent Sen. Joseph Lieberman to proceed with debate.
Bush said that Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff will work with senators to reach a compromise.
"We are certainly pleased with the early vote on the motion to proceed," White House spokesman Tony Snow told reporters shortly after the Senate decision. He said he looks forward to the debates.
Opponents of the bill say that the path to citizenship amounts to amnesty for those who entered the country illegally. The 24 amendments to be considered -- 12 for Democrats and 12 for Republicans, seek to change some of the more controversial parts of the legislation.
Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, one of the bill's more vocal opponents said he is still concerned about enforcing tougher laws.
"My concern is the gulf between the promise being made to the American people and the likelihood that the promise will be carried out," Cornyn said before the vote. "The White House said this is of no concern because they will declare them ineligible and deport them.
"The question Americans are asking is, 'Will they? Can they,' " Cornyn said.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, said the Senate had to address the issue.
"The stakes are too high for inaction," Reid said. "We are the Senate of the United States. People said, 'The issue is too complex, let's not do it.' We have to take hard votes.
"Mr. President, we have an immigration system that is broken and needs to be fixed. That's what we're trying to do is fix this," Reid said.
A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll released Monday showed 47 percent of Americans opposed the bill, while 30 percent supported it and 19 percent said they didn't know enough about it to make a judgment. The poll's sampling error was plus or minus 3 percentage points.
However, the poll found a significant division among opponents of the immigration plan. About 28 percent said they were opposed because it did too much to help illegal immigrants, but 15 percent said they were opposed because it did too little.
So while much of the opposition to the bill has come from those who believe it is too soft on illegal immigration, the poll found that 45 percent of Americans either support the bill or want it to be more immigrant-friendly, compared to 28 percent who feel it's already too immigrant-friendly.
CNN's Dana Bash and Evan Glass contributed to this report.
Some major amendments to be considered before a final vote:
• Crack down on people who remain after expiration of their visas, require that all illegal immigrant heads of household seeking lawful status return home as long as they meet a certain wealth threshold -- offered by Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, Jon Kyl, R-Arizona, and Mel Martinez, R-Florida.
• Limit legalization to unlawful immigrants who have been in the country four years or more, by Sen. Jim Webb, D-Virginia.
• Require all illegal immigrant heads of household to return home within two years, before gaining any kind of lawful status, offered by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas.
• Award more points in the merit-based green card allocation system for family ties to U.S. citizens or legal permanent residents, by Sen. Robert Menendez, D-New Jersey.
• Replace the worker identification program, narrowing the group of employees who businesses would have to check, by Sens. Max Baucus, D-Montana, Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, and Barack Obama, D-Illinois.
• Deny illegal immigrants the chance to get green cards, by Sen. Kit Bond, R-Missouri.
--Associated Press
_________________________________________________________________
Why is it Mr. President that you insist on fixing a problem with a solution a majority of American don't want? Seems to me, El Senior Presidente that you have your priorities all screwed up!
The Weird Russian Mind-Control Research Behind a DHS Contract
http://www.wired.com/politics/security/news/2007/09/mind_reading#
The Weird Russian Mind-Control Research Behind a DHS Contract
By Sharon Weinberger 09.20.07 | 2:00 AM
A dungeon-like room in the Psychotechnology Research Institute in Moscow is used for human testing. The institute claims its technology can read the subconscious mind and alter behavior.
Photo: Nathan Hodge MOSCOW -- The future of U.S. anti-terrorism technology could lie near the end of a Moscow subway line in a circular dungeon-like room with a single door and no windows. Here, at the Psychotechnology Research Institute, human subjects submit to experiments aimed at manipulating their subconscious minds.
Elena Rusalkina, the silver-haired woman who runs the institute, gestured to the center of the claustrophobic room, where what looked like a dentist's chair sits in front of a glowing computer monitor. "We've had volunteers, a lot of them," she said, the thick concrete walls muffling the noise from the college campus outside. "We worked out a program with (a psychiatric facility) to study criminals. There's no way to falsify the results. There's no subjectivism."
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has gone to many strange places in its search for ways to identify terrorists before they attack, but perhaps none stranger than this lab on the outskirts of Russia's capital. The institute has for years served as the center of an obscure field of human behavior study -- dubbed psychoecology -- that traces it roots back to Soviet-era mind control research.
What's gotten DHS' attention is the institute's work on a system called Semantic Stimuli Response Measurements Technology, or SSRM Tek, a software-based mind reader that supposedly tests a subject's involuntary response to subliminal messages.
SSRM Tek is presented to a subject as an innocent computer game that flashes subliminal images across the screen -- like pictures of Osama bin Laden or the World Trade Center. The "player" -- a traveler at an airport screening line, for example -- presses a button in response to the images, without consciously registering what he or she is looking at. The terrorist's response to the scrambled image involuntarily differs from the innocent person's, according to the theory.
Gear for testing MindReader 2.0 software hangs on a wall at the Psychotechnology Research Institute in Moscow. Marketed in North America as SSRM Tek, the technology will soon be tested for airport screening by a U.S. company under contract to the Department of Homeland Security.
Photo: Nathan Hodge"If it's a clean result, the passengers are allowed through," said Rusalkina, during a reporter's visit last year. "If there's something there, that person will need to go through extra checks."
Rusalkina markets the technology as a program called Mindreader 2.0. To sell Mindreader to the West, she's teamed up with a Canadian firm, which is now working with a U.S. defense contractor called SRS Technologies. This May, DHS announced plans to award a sole-source contract to conduct the first U.S.-government sponsored testing of SSRM Tek.
The contract is a small victory for the Psychotechnology Research Institute and its leaders, who have struggled for years to be accepted in the West. It also illustrates how the search for counter-terrorism technology has led the U.S. government into unconventional -- and some would say unsound -- science.
All of the technology at the institute is based on the work of Rusalkina's late husband, Igor Smirnov, a controversial Russian scientist whose incredible tales of mind control attracted frequent press attention before his death several years ago.
Smirnov was a Rasputin-like character often portrayed in the media as having almost mystical powers of persuasion. Today, first-time visitors to the institute -- housed in a drab concrete building at the Peoples Friendship University of Russia -- are asked to watch a half-hour television program dedicated to Smirnov, who is called the father of "psychotronic weapons," the Russian term for mind control weapons. Bearded and confident, Smirnov in the video explains how subliminal sounds could alter a person's behavior. To the untrained ear, the demonstration sounds like squealing pigs.
According to Rusalkina, the Soviet military enlisted Smirnov's psychotechnology during the Soviet Union's bloody war in Afghanistan in the 1980s. "It was used for combating the Mujahideen, and also for treating post-traumatic stress syndrome" in Russian soldiers, she says.
In the United States, talk of mind control typically evokes visions of tinfoil hats. But the idea of psychotronic weapons enjoys some respectability in Russia. In the late 1990s, Vladimir Lopatin, then a member of the Duma, Russia's parliament, pushed to restrict mind control weapons, a move that was taken seriously in Russia but elicited some curious mentions in the Western press. In an interview in Moscow, Lopatin, who has since left the Duma, cited Smirnov's work as proof that such weaponry is real.
"It's financed and used not only by the medical community, but also by individual and criminal groups," Lopatin said. Terrorists might also get hold of such weapons, he added.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Smirnov moved from military research into treating patients with mental problems and drug addiction, setting up shop at the college. Most of the lab's research is focused on what it calls "psychocorrection" -- the use of subliminal messages to bend a subject's will, and even modify a person's personality without their knowledge.
The slow migration of Smirnov's technology to the United States began in 1991, at a KGB-sponsored conference in Moscow intended to market once-secret Soviet technology to the world. Smirnov's claims of mind control piqued the interest of Chris and Janet Morris -- former science-fiction writers turned Pentagon consultants who are now widely credited as founders of the Pentagon's "non-lethal" weapons concept.
In an interview last year, Chris Morris recalled being intrigued by Smirnov -- so much so that he accompanied the researcher to his lab and allowed Smirnov to wire his head up to an electroencephalograph, or EEG. Normally used by scientists to measure brain states, Smirnov peered into Morris's EEG tracings and divined the secrets of his subconscious, right down to intimate details like Morris' dislike of his own first name.
The underlying premise of the technology is that terrorists would recognize a scrambled terrorist image like this one without even realizing it, and would be betrayed by their subconscious reaction to the picture.
Photo: Nathan Hodge"I said, 'gee, the guys back at home have got to see this,'" Morris recalled.
The Morrises shopped the technology around to a few military agencies, but found no one willing to put money into it. However, in 1993 Smirnov rose to brief fame in the United States when the FBI consulted with him in hope of ending the standoff in Waco with cult leader David Koresh. Smirnov proposed blasting scrambled sound -- the pig squeals again -- over loudspeakers to persuade Koresh to surrender.
But the FBI was put off by Smirnov's cavalier response to questions. When officials asked what would happen if the subliminal signals didn't work, Smirnov replied that Koresh's followers might slit each other's throats, Morris recounted. The FBI took a pass, and Smirnov returned to Moscow with his mind control technology.
"With Smirnov, the FBI was either demanding a yes or a no, and therefore our methods weren't put to use, unfortunately," Rusalkina said, taking a drag on her cigarette.
Smirnov died in November 2004, leaving the widowed Rusalkina -- his long-time collaborator -- to run the institute. Portraits of Smirnov cover Rusalkina's desk, and his former office is like a shrine, the walls lined with his once-secret patents, his awards from the Soviet government, and a calendar from the KGB's cryptographic section.
Despite Smirnov's death, Rusalkina predicts an "arms race" in psychotronic weapons. Such weapons, she asserts, are far more dangerous than nuclear weapons.
She pointed, for example, to a spate of Russian news reports about "zombies" -- innocent people whose memories had been allegedly wiped out by mind control weapons. She also claimed that Russian special forces contacted the institute during the 2003 Moscow theater siege, in which several hundred people were held hostage by Chechen militants.
"We could have stabilized the situation in the concert hall, and the terrorists would have called the whole thing off," she said. "And naturally, you could have avoided all the casualties, and you could have put the terrorists on trial. But the Alfa Group" -- the Russian equivalent of Delta Force -- "decided to go with an old method that had already been tested before."
The Russians used a narcotic gas to subdue the attackers and their captives, which led to the asphyxiation death of many of the hostages.
These days, Rusalkina explained, the institute uses its psychotechnology to treat alcoholics and drug addicts. During the interview, several patients -- gaunt young men who appeared wasted from illness -- waited in the hallway.
But the U.S. war on terror and the millions of dollars set aside for homeland security research is offering Smirnov a chance at posthumous respectability in the West.
Smirnov's technology reappeared on the U.S. government's radar screen through Northam Psychotechnologies, a Canadian company that serves as North American distributor for the Psychotechnology Research Institute. About three years ago, Northam Psychotechnologies began seeking out U.S. partners to help it crack the DHS market. For companies claiming innovative technologies, the past few years have provided bountiful opportunities. In fiscal year 2007, DHS allocated $973 million for science and technology and recently announced Project Hostile Intent, which is designed to develop technologies to detect people with malicious intentions.
One California-based defense contractor, DownRange G2 Solutions, expressed interest in SSRM Tek, but became skeptical when Northam Psychotechnologies declined to make the software available for testing.
"That raised our suspicion right away," Scott Conn, CEO and president of DownRange, told Wired News. "We weren't prepared to put our good names on the line without due diligence." (When a reporter visited last year, Rusalkina also declined to demonstrate the software, saying it wasn't working that day.)
While Conn said the lack of testing bothered him, the relationship ended when he found out Northam Psychotechnologies went to SRS Technologies, now part of ManTech International Corp.
Semyon Ioffe, the head of Northam Psychotechnologies, who identifies himself as a "brain scientist," declined a phone interview, but answered questions over e-mail. Ioffe said he signed a nondisclosure agreement with Conn, and had "a few informal discussions, after which he disappeared to a different assignment and reappeared after (the) DHS announcement."
As for the science, Ioffe says he has a Ph.D in neurophysiology, and cited Smirnov's Russian-language publications as the basis for SSRM Tek.
(Igor Smirnov, founder of the Psychotechnology Research Institute, died of a heart attack in 2005. Smirnov is best known in the United States for consulting with the FBI during the 1993 Waco siege.)
However, not everyone is as impressed with Smirnov's technology, including John Alexander, a well-known expert on non-lethal weapons. Alexander was familiar with Smirnov's meetings in Washington during the Waco crisis, and said in an interview last year that there were serious doubts then as now.
"It was the height of the Waco problem, they were grasping at straws," he said of the FBI's fleeting interest. "From what I understand from people who were there, it didn't work very well."
Geoff Schoenbaum, a neuroscientist at the University of Maryland's School of Medicine, said that he was unaware of any scientific work specifically underpinning the technology described in SSRM Tek.
"There's no question your brain is able to perceive things below your ability to consciously express or identify," Schoenbaum said. He noted for example, studies showing that images displayed for milliseconds -- too short for people to perceive consciously -- may influence someone's mood. "That kind of thing is reasonable, and there's good experimental evidence behind it."
The problem, he said, is that there is no science he is aware of that can produce the specificity or sensitivity to pick out a terrorist, let alone influence behavior. "We're still working at the level of how rats learn that light predicts food," he explained. "That's the level of modern neuroscience."
Developments in neuroscience, he noted, are followed closely. "If we could do (what they're talking about), you would know about it," Schoenbaum said. "It wouldn't be a handful of Russian folks in a basement."
In the meantime, the DHS contract is still imminent, according to those involved, although all parties declined to comment on the details, or the size of the award. Rusalkina did not respond to a recent e-mail, but in the interview last year, she confirmed the institute was marketing the technology to the United States for airport screening.
Larry Orloskie, a spokesman for DHS, declined to comment on the contract announcement. "It has not been awarded yet," he replied in an e-mail.
"It would be premature to discuss any details about the pending contract with DHS and I will be happy to do an interview once the contract is in place," Ioffe, of Northam Psychotechnologies, wrote in an e-mail. Mark Root, a spokesman for ManTech, deferred questions to DHS, noting, "They are the customer."
The Weird Russian Mind-Control Research Behind a DHS Contract
By Sharon Weinberger 09.20.07 | 2:00 AM
A dungeon-like room in the Psychotechnology Research Institute in Moscow is used for human testing. The institute claims its technology can read the subconscious mind and alter behavior.
Photo: Nathan Hodge MOSCOW -- The future of U.S. anti-terrorism technology could lie near the end of a Moscow subway line in a circular dungeon-like room with a single door and no windows. Here, at the Psychotechnology Research Institute, human subjects submit to experiments aimed at manipulating their subconscious minds.
Elena Rusalkina, the silver-haired woman who runs the institute, gestured to the center of the claustrophobic room, where what looked like a dentist's chair sits in front of a glowing computer monitor. "We've had volunteers, a lot of them," she said, the thick concrete walls muffling the noise from the college campus outside. "We worked out a program with (a psychiatric facility) to study criminals. There's no way to falsify the results. There's no subjectivism."
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has gone to many strange places in its search for ways to identify terrorists before they attack, but perhaps none stranger than this lab on the outskirts of Russia's capital. The institute has for years served as the center of an obscure field of human behavior study -- dubbed psychoecology -- that traces it roots back to Soviet-era mind control research.
What's gotten DHS' attention is the institute's work on a system called Semantic Stimuli Response Measurements Technology, or SSRM Tek, a software-based mind reader that supposedly tests a subject's involuntary response to subliminal messages.
SSRM Tek is presented to a subject as an innocent computer game that flashes subliminal images across the screen -- like pictures of Osama bin Laden or the World Trade Center. The "player" -- a traveler at an airport screening line, for example -- presses a button in response to the images, without consciously registering what he or she is looking at. The terrorist's response to the scrambled image involuntarily differs from the innocent person's, according to the theory.
Gear for testing MindReader 2.0 software hangs on a wall at the Psychotechnology Research Institute in Moscow. Marketed in North America as SSRM Tek, the technology will soon be tested for airport screening by a U.S. company under contract to the Department of Homeland Security.
Photo: Nathan Hodge"If it's a clean result, the passengers are allowed through," said Rusalkina, during a reporter's visit last year. "If there's something there, that person will need to go through extra checks."
Rusalkina markets the technology as a program called Mindreader 2.0. To sell Mindreader to the West, she's teamed up with a Canadian firm, which is now working with a U.S. defense contractor called SRS Technologies. This May, DHS announced plans to award a sole-source contract to conduct the first U.S.-government sponsored testing of SSRM Tek.
The contract is a small victory for the Psychotechnology Research Institute and its leaders, who have struggled for years to be accepted in the West. It also illustrates how the search for counter-terrorism technology has led the U.S. government into unconventional -- and some would say unsound -- science.
All of the technology at the institute is based on the work of Rusalkina's late husband, Igor Smirnov, a controversial Russian scientist whose incredible tales of mind control attracted frequent press attention before his death several years ago.
Smirnov was a Rasputin-like character often portrayed in the media as having almost mystical powers of persuasion. Today, first-time visitors to the institute -- housed in a drab concrete building at the Peoples Friendship University of Russia -- are asked to watch a half-hour television program dedicated to Smirnov, who is called the father of "psychotronic weapons," the Russian term for mind control weapons. Bearded and confident, Smirnov in the video explains how subliminal sounds could alter a person's behavior. To the untrained ear, the demonstration sounds like squealing pigs.
According to Rusalkina, the Soviet military enlisted Smirnov's psychotechnology during the Soviet Union's bloody war in Afghanistan in the 1980s. "It was used for combating the Mujahideen, and also for treating post-traumatic stress syndrome" in Russian soldiers, she says.
In the United States, talk of mind control typically evokes visions of tinfoil hats. But the idea of psychotronic weapons enjoys some respectability in Russia. In the late 1990s, Vladimir Lopatin, then a member of the Duma, Russia's parliament, pushed to restrict mind control weapons, a move that was taken seriously in Russia but elicited some curious mentions in the Western press. In an interview in Moscow, Lopatin, who has since left the Duma, cited Smirnov's work as proof that such weaponry is real.
"It's financed and used not only by the medical community, but also by individual and criminal groups," Lopatin said. Terrorists might also get hold of such weapons, he added.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, Smirnov moved from military research into treating patients with mental problems and drug addiction, setting up shop at the college. Most of the lab's research is focused on what it calls "psychocorrection" -- the use of subliminal messages to bend a subject's will, and even modify a person's personality without their knowledge.
The slow migration of Smirnov's technology to the United States began in 1991, at a KGB-sponsored conference in Moscow intended to market once-secret Soviet technology to the world. Smirnov's claims of mind control piqued the interest of Chris and Janet Morris -- former science-fiction writers turned Pentagon consultants who are now widely credited as founders of the Pentagon's "non-lethal" weapons concept.
In an interview last year, Chris Morris recalled being intrigued by Smirnov -- so much so that he accompanied the researcher to his lab and allowed Smirnov to wire his head up to an electroencephalograph, or EEG. Normally used by scientists to measure brain states, Smirnov peered into Morris's EEG tracings and divined the secrets of his subconscious, right down to intimate details like Morris' dislike of his own first name.
The underlying premise of the technology is that terrorists would recognize a scrambled terrorist image like this one without even realizing it, and would be betrayed by their subconscious reaction to the picture.
Photo: Nathan Hodge"I said, 'gee, the guys back at home have got to see this,'" Morris recalled.
The Morrises shopped the technology around to a few military agencies, but found no one willing to put money into it. However, in 1993 Smirnov rose to brief fame in the United States when the FBI consulted with him in hope of ending the standoff in Waco with cult leader David Koresh. Smirnov proposed blasting scrambled sound -- the pig squeals again -- over loudspeakers to persuade Koresh to surrender.
But the FBI was put off by Smirnov's cavalier response to questions. When officials asked what would happen if the subliminal signals didn't work, Smirnov replied that Koresh's followers might slit each other's throats, Morris recounted. The FBI took a pass, and Smirnov returned to Moscow with his mind control technology.
"With Smirnov, the FBI was either demanding a yes or a no, and therefore our methods weren't put to use, unfortunately," Rusalkina said, taking a drag on her cigarette.
Smirnov died in November 2004, leaving the widowed Rusalkina -- his long-time collaborator -- to run the institute. Portraits of Smirnov cover Rusalkina's desk, and his former office is like a shrine, the walls lined with his once-secret patents, his awards from the Soviet government, and a calendar from the KGB's cryptographic section.
Despite Smirnov's death, Rusalkina predicts an "arms race" in psychotronic weapons. Such weapons, she asserts, are far more dangerous than nuclear weapons.
She pointed, for example, to a spate of Russian news reports about "zombies" -- innocent people whose memories had been allegedly wiped out by mind control weapons. She also claimed that Russian special forces contacted the institute during the 2003 Moscow theater siege, in which several hundred people were held hostage by Chechen militants.
"We could have stabilized the situation in the concert hall, and the terrorists would have called the whole thing off," she said. "And naturally, you could have avoided all the casualties, and you could have put the terrorists on trial. But the Alfa Group" -- the Russian equivalent of Delta Force -- "decided to go with an old method that had already been tested before."
The Russians used a narcotic gas to subdue the attackers and their captives, which led to the asphyxiation death of many of the hostages.
These days, Rusalkina explained, the institute uses its psychotechnology to treat alcoholics and drug addicts. During the interview, several patients -- gaunt young men who appeared wasted from illness -- waited in the hallway.
But the U.S. war on terror and the millions of dollars set aside for homeland security research is offering Smirnov a chance at posthumous respectability in the West.
Smirnov's technology reappeared on the U.S. government's radar screen through Northam Psychotechnologies, a Canadian company that serves as North American distributor for the Psychotechnology Research Institute. About three years ago, Northam Psychotechnologies began seeking out U.S. partners to help it crack the DHS market. For companies claiming innovative technologies, the past few years have provided bountiful opportunities. In fiscal year 2007, DHS allocated $973 million for science and technology and recently announced Project Hostile Intent, which is designed to develop technologies to detect people with malicious intentions.
One California-based defense contractor, DownRange G2 Solutions, expressed interest in SSRM Tek, but became skeptical when Northam Psychotechnologies declined to make the software available for testing.
"That raised our suspicion right away," Scott Conn, CEO and president of DownRange, told Wired News. "We weren't prepared to put our good names on the line without due diligence." (When a reporter visited last year, Rusalkina also declined to demonstrate the software, saying it wasn't working that day.)
While Conn said the lack of testing bothered him, the relationship ended when he found out Northam Psychotechnologies went to SRS Technologies, now part of ManTech International Corp.
Semyon Ioffe, the head of Northam Psychotechnologies, who identifies himself as a "brain scientist," declined a phone interview, but answered questions over e-mail. Ioffe said he signed a nondisclosure agreement with Conn, and had "a few informal discussions, after which he disappeared to a different assignment and reappeared after (the) DHS announcement."
As for the science, Ioffe says he has a Ph.D in neurophysiology, and cited Smirnov's Russian-language publications as the basis for SSRM Tek.
(Igor Smirnov, founder of the Psychotechnology Research Institute, died of a heart attack in 2005. Smirnov is best known in the United States for consulting with the FBI during the 1993 Waco siege.)
However, not everyone is as impressed with Smirnov's technology, including John Alexander, a well-known expert on non-lethal weapons. Alexander was familiar with Smirnov's meetings in Washington during the Waco crisis, and said in an interview last year that there were serious doubts then as now.
"It was the height of the Waco problem, they were grasping at straws," he said of the FBI's fleeting interest. "From what I understand from people who were there, it didn't work very well."
Geoff Schoenbaum, a neuroscientist at the University of Maryland's School of Medicine, said that he was unaware of any scientific work specifically underpinning the technology described in SSRM Tek.
"There's no question your brain is able to perceive things below your ability to consciously express or identify," Schoenbaum said. He noted for example, studies showing that images displayed for milliseconds -- too short for people to perceive consciously -- may influence someone's mood. "That kind of thing is reasonable, and there's good experimental evidence behind it."
The problem, he said, is that there is no science he is aware of that can produce the specificity or sensitivity to pick out a terrorist, let alone influence behavior. "We're still working at the level of how rats learn that light predicts food," he explained. "That's the level of modern neuroscience."
Developments in neuroscience, he noted, are followed closely. "If we could do (what they're talking about), you would know about it," Schoenbaum said. "It wouldn't be a handful of Russian folks in a basement."
In the meantime, the DHS contract is still imminent, according to those involved, although all parties declined to comment on the details, or the size of the award. Rusalkina did not respond to a recent e-mail, but in the interview last year, she confirmed the institute was marketing the technology to the United States for airport screening.
Larry Orloskie, a spokesman for DHS, declined to comment on the contract announcement. "It has not been awarded yet," he replied in an e-mail.
"It would be premature to discuss any details about the pending contract with DHS and I will be happy to do an interview once the contract is in place," Ioffe, of Northam Psychotechnologies, wrote in an e-mail. Mark Root, a spokesman for ManTech, deferred questions to DHS, noting, "They are the customer."
Mexican curriculum in Oregon schools stirs debate
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_091907_education_mexican_curriculum_.ede64566.html
Mexican curriculum in Oregon schools stirs debate
11:05 AM PDT on Thursday, September 20, 2007
Associated Press
Some Oregon high schools are adopting Mexico's public school curriculum to help educate Spanish-speaking students with textbooks, an online Web site, DVDs and CDs provided free by Mexico to teach math, science and even U.S. history.
The Oregon Department of Education and Mexico's Secretariat of Public Education are discussing aligning their curricula so courses will be valid in both countries.
Similar ventures are under way in Yakima, Wash., San Diego, Calif., and Austin, Texas.
"Students come to us with such complex issues," said Tim King, director of Clackamas Middle College and Clackamas Web Academy, where a virtual course using Mexico's learning materials got started this week.
"We've had to change in order to fit into each school scene, become more complex and open ourselves up to new situations."
Oregon officials say the approach is intended as a supplement to keep students learning in Spanish while also gaining English skills.
BLOG: Mexican curriculum incites debate
Until now, Oregon school districts generally have relied on bilingual aides or used Spanish material different from the English material others are studying.
"That's not enough," said Patrick Burk, chief policy officer with the superintendent's office of the Oregon Department of Education. He said the idea is minimal disruption for immigrant Latinos.
"The availability of resources is astounding," said Burk, who flew to Mexico with Oregon curriculum officials in August to discuss making equivalency standards official. "We're able to serve the students so much better if we're working together."
Portland Principal: "Blacks are different"
Parent's complaint letter over comments
Talk of the Town Blog: Accusations flying
Mexico has made its national curriculum available to communities across the U.S. since 2001 to encourage Mexican adults and youths to continue an education often abandoned back home due to limited resources.
"We wanted people to be aware that they have to study," said Patricia Ramos, the director of national affairs for Mexico's Institute for Adult Education and National Advisory of Education for Life and Work.
"You have to dare to study and make use of technology because that way, it will be easier to adapt to where you now live."
In other places, the curriculum was used to educate students' parents, rescue dropouts and even teach inmates. A program exists now at MacLaren Youth Correctional Facility in Woodburn.
The program caught the attention of public schools such as Reynolds High School in Troutdale and Marshall Night School, an alternative school based at Marshall High School in Portland.
At Marshall, the material has been used in night school and may soon move into daytime classrooms.
At Reynolds, educators began using part of Mexico's curriculum to teach a Spanish literacy class.
Students learned punctuation and sentence structure in Spanish and then saw improvement in English progress, said Dale Bernardini, a teacher who handles the partnership for Reynolds School District.
This fall, textbooks, DVDs and Mexico's curriculum Web were introduced in Francisco Rico's math classroom at Reynolds.
"We're just ahead with all the materials," he said. "We have the Web site where students can do exercises ... they can learn through visual and audio. We were having trouble bringing something that would be familiar to their culture."
In Washington state, nearly 30 schools have already implemented Mexico's curriculum into the classrooms.
In Oregon, learning materials are free, but districts must pay for staff. So far, two computer servers supporting Mexico's Web site cost the state about $10,000 to install and about $2,200 annually to maintain.
One of the biggest challenges will be finding more Spanish-speaking instructors, said Burk of the Oregon Department of Education.
He said about 15 percent of Oregon students are Latino, compared with 2 percent of teachers.
Mexican curriculum in Oregon schools stirs debate
11:05 AM PDT on Thursday, September 20, 2007
Associated Press
Some Oregon high schools are adopting Mexico's public school curriculum to help educate Spanish-speaking students with textbooks, an online Web site, DVDs and CDs provided free by Mexico to teach math, science and even U.S. history.
The Oregon Department of Education and Mexico's Secretariat of Public Education are discussing aligning their curricula so courses will be valid in both countries.
Similar ventures are under way in Yakima, Wash., San Diego, Calif., and Austin, Texas.
"Students come to us with such complex issues," said Tim King, director of Clackamas Middle College and Clackamas Web Academy, where a virtual course using Mexico's learning materials got started this week.
"We've had to change in order to fit into each school scene, become more complex and open ourselves up to new situations."
Oregon officials say the approach is intended as a supplement to keep students learning in Spanish while also gaining English skills.
BLOG: Mexican curriculum incites debate
Until now, Oregon school districts generally have relied on bilingual aides or used Spanish material different from the English material others are studying.
"That's not enough," said Patrick Burk, chief policy officer with the superintendent's office of the Oregon Department of Education. He said the idea is minimal disruption for immigrant Latinos.
"The availability of resources is astounding," said Burk, who flew to Mexico with Oregon curriculum officials in August to discuss making equivalency standards official. "We're able to serve the students so much better if we're working together."
Portland Principal: "Blacks are different"
Parent's complaint letter over comments
Talk of the Town Blog: Accusations flying
Mexico has made its national curriculum available to communities across the U.S. since 2001 to encourage Mexican adults and youths to continue an education often abandoned back home due to limited resources.
"We wanted people to be aware that they have to study," said Patricia Ramos, the director of national affairs for Mexico's Institute for Adult Education and National Advisory of Education for Life and Work.
"You have to dare to study and make use of technology because that way, it will be easier to adapt to where you now live."
In other places, the curriculum was used to educate students' parents, rescue dropouts and even teach inmates. A program exists now at MacLaren Youth Correctional Facility in Woodburn.
The program caught the attention of public schools such as Reynolds High School in Troutdale and Marshall Night School, an alternative school based at Marshall High School in Portland.
At Marshall, the material has been used in night school and may soon move into daytime classrooms.
At Reynolds, educators began using part of Mexico's curriculum to teach a Spanish literacy class.
Students learned punctuation and sentence structure in Spanish and then saw improvement in English progress, said Dale Bernardini, a teacher who handles the partnership for Reynolds School District.
This fall, textbooks, DVDs and Mexico's curriculum Web were introduced in Francisco Rico's math classroom at Reynolds.
"We're just ahead with all the materials," he said. "We have the Web site where students can do exercises ... they can learn through visual and audio. We were having trouble bringing something that would be familiar to their culture."
In Washington state, nearly 30 schools have already implemented Mexico's curriculum into the classrooms.
In Oregon, learning materials are free, but districts must pay for staff. So far, two computer servers supporting Mexico's Web site cost the state about $10,000 to install and about $2,200 annually to maintain.
One of the biggest challenges will be finding more Spanish-speaking instructors, said Burk of the Oregon Department of Education.
He said about 15 percent of Oregon students are Latino, compared with 2 percent of teachers.
Soviet plan for WW3 nuclear attack unearthed
Soviet plan for WW3 nuclear attack unearthed
By Henry Samuel in Paris
Last Updated: 3:54am BST 21/09/2007
Chilling Soviet plans to launch massive nuclear strikes in Europe followed by a ground offensive in Germany and southern France have been unearthed by a Nato historian.
Soviet troops were to storm across Europe
According to scenarios drafted in 1964, Warsaw Pact forces planned to use 131 tactical nuclear missiles and bombs to sideline NATO armaments and destroy Western Europe’s political and communications centres, in the event of an “imperialist” strike.
In an alarming insight into the “Doctor Strangelove” mindset of Soviet strategists, the Czechoslovak People’s Army, CSLA, was then expected to immediately march over deadly radioactive landscape and invade Nuremburg, Stuttgart and Munich, then bastions of West Germany.
On the ninth day the troops would take Lyon, south eastern France.
Soviet reinforcements would then continue the offensive towards the Pyrenees in the west.
“Russians outlined the general (war) plan, while the (leaders of) individual Warsaw Pact armies prepared precise military blueprints, with details on front lines, deployment of troops and arms,” said Mr Lunak.
The text, written in Russian and entitled CSLA Plan of Action for a War Period, was signed by the Czech defence minister of the time and carried president Antonin Novotny’s stamp of approval.
According to Mr Lunak, the plan was still an option until 1986, three years before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
It was shelved by Vaclav Havel in 1990 when he was elected Czech president.
While most Western planners were convinced that any first strike would lead to total mutual destruction, the plan - written in matter-of-fact language - shows that Warsaw Pact nations presumed a massive ground war would follow nuclear attacks.
Mr Lunak described the military plans as “fairy tale” thinking based on World War II warfare: “They (the Soviets) really planned to send ground troops out in the field and have them fight for a few days until they died from radiation,” he said.
The final draft of the invasion plan was completed under Soviet Communist Party chief Nikita Khrushchev, shortly after the 1961 Cuban missile crisis, when the United States and the Soviet Union had teetered on the brink of war.
According to the Prague documents, Moscow’s commanders fully expected western “imperialists” to make the first nuclear strike.
Mr Lunak includes the plans, as well as interviews with Czech generals of the time in his book, Planning the Unthinkable: Czechoslovak War Plans, 1950-1990.
The first English translation of the text was published earlier this month by the Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security, which analyses and publishes declassified NATO and Warsaw Pact archives.
Vojtech Mastny, a senior fellow at the National Security Archive in Washington, D.C., who coordinates the project, said the 1964 document is the first such detailed war plan to come to light. “There’s no doubt that the plan would have been used if the green light was given from above - the political leadership of the communist bloc,” he said.
By Henry Samuel in Paris
Last Updated: 3:54am BST 21/09/2007
Chilling Soviet plans to launch massive nuclear strikes in Europe followed by a ground offensive in Germany and southern France have been unearthed by a Nato historian.
Soviet troops were to storm across Europe
According to scenarios drafted in 1964, Warsaw Pact forces planned to use 131 tactical nuclear missiles and bombs to sideline NATO armaments and destroy Western Europe’s political and communications centres, in the event of an “imperialist” strike.
In an alarming insight into the “Doctor Strangelove” mindset of Soviet strategists, the Czechoslovak People’s Army, CSLA, was then expected to immediately march over deadly radioactive landscape and invade Nuremburg, Stuttgart and Munich, then bastions of West Germany.
On the ninth day the troops would take Lyon, south eastern France.
Soviet reinforcements would then continue the offensive towards the Pyrenees in the west.
“Russians outlined the general (war) plan, while the (leaders of) individual Warsaw Pact armies prepared precise military blueprints, with details on front lines, deployment of troops and arms,” said Mr Lunak.
The text, written in Russian and entitled CSLA Plan of Action for a War Period, was signed by the Czech defence minister of the time and carried president Antonin Novotny’s stamp of approval.
According to Mr Lunak, the plan was still an option until 1986, three years before the fall of the Berlin Wall.
It was shelved by Vaclav Havel in 1990 when he was elected Czech president.
While most Western planners were convinced that any first strike would lead to total mutual destruction, the plan - written in matter-of-fact language - shows that Warsaw Pact nations presumed a massive ground war would follow nuclear attacks.
Mr Lunak described the military plans as “fairy tale” thinking based on World War II warfare: “They (the Soviets) really planned to send ground troops out in the field and have them fight for a few days until they died from radiation,” he said.
The final draft of the invasion plan was completed under Soviet Communist Party chief Nikita Khrushchev, shortly after the 1961 Cuban missile crisis, when the United States and the Soviet Union had teetered on the brink of war.
According to the Prague documents, Moscow’s commanders fully expected western “imperialists” to make the first nuclear strike.
Mr Lunak includes the plans, as well as interviews with Czech generals of the time in his book, Planning the Unthinkable: Czechoslovak War Plans, 1950-1990.
The first English translation of the text was published earlier this month by the Parallel History Project on Cooperative Security, which analyses and publishes declassified NATO and Warsaw Pact archives.
Vojtech Mastny, a senior fellow at the National Security Archive in Washington, D.C., who coordinates the project, said the 1964 document is the first such detailed war plan to come to light. “There’s no doubt that the plan would have been used if the green light was given from above - the political leadership of the communist bloc,” he said.
Law of the Sea Treaty doesn't hold water
Law of the Sea Treaty doesn't hold water
With all the critical problems facing America today, it's hard to see why President Bush is wasting whatever is left of his political capital to partner with Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., to try to get the Senate to ratify the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty.
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden is scheduled to hold a hearing loaded with pro-treaty witnesses and then try to sneak through ratification while the public is focused on other globalism and giveaway mischief.
The Law of the Sea Treaty is the globalists' dream bill. It would put the United States in a de facto world government that rules all the world's oceans under the pretense that they belong to "the common heritage of mankind." That's global-speak for allowing the United Nations and its affiliated organizations to carry out a massive, unprecedented redistribution of wealth from the United States to other countries.
The treaty has already been ratified by 155 countries. Most of them no doubt expect corrupt U.N. bureaucrats to divvy up the riches at the bottom of the sea, which will be brought to the surface by U.S. investment and technology, and parcel them out to Third World dictators to support themselves in the lavish style to which they would like to become accustomed.
Why must those who believe in American sovereignty have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again? President Ronald Reagan rejected the Law of the Sea Treaty in 1982, not because of picky details in the text, but because the treaty would put the United States in the clutches of a supranational ruling clique.
The argument is being made that Reagan's objections were "fixed" in 1994. That's a sham because no one country can legally change the terms of a treaty that has already been signed and ratified by more than 100 countries, and 25 countries have not agreed to the 1994 changes anyway.
Furthermore, changing a few details of the treaty does nothing to address the massive loss of U.S. sovereignty, which Reagan and other Americans found impudent and obnoxious.
The treaty has already created the International Seabed Authority and given it total jurisdiction over all the oceans and everything in them, including "solid, liquid or gaseous mineral resources." The treaty even gives the Authority something U.N. bureaucrats have lusted after for years: the authority to impose international taxes (disguised by euphemisms such as fees and royalties).
The treaty would subject our governmental, military and business operations to mandatory dispute resolution by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg, Germany. If you think activist judges in the United States are out of control, wait until you try your case before this U.N. tribunal, whose decisions cannot be appealed.
Because several U.S. Supreme Court justices are on record as using, and urging others to use, foreign law in deciding U.S. cases, the treaty would be an open invitation to activist judges in the U.S. to interpret the treaty's purposely vague provisions. Liberal U.S. judges might even develop the theory that the treaty is "evolving" (like liberal notions about the U.S. Constitution), so that liberal social and, especially, environmental biases could be written into U.S. laws.
All Law of the Sea Treaty agencies are U.N. organizations, and the U.N. secretary general plays an important role in administering the treaty. With the U.N.'s shocking track record of corruption, it makes no sense to give it a new infusion of power and money.
The Bush administration argues that the United States needs the treaty to protect U.S. interests in the world's oceans and to ensure that the U.S. Navy can go where it needs to go. The problem with that argument is that if the U.S. signs and ratifies the treaty, America will be bound to abide by its decisions.
Based on U.S. experience in other international organizations such as the World Trade Organization, decisions will usually be contrary to U.S. security and economic interests. The U.S. Navy can already go wherever it needs to go, and it should remain that way.
One of the silliest arguments is that the U.S. needs the treaty to guard against Russian claims to the North Pole and its oil riches. If the United States ratifies the treaty, America would have to accept the treaty tribunal's decision.
Even though the United States already has valid claims to the North Pole region under the Doctrine of Discovery, the chances of the treaty bureaucrats ruling for the U.S. against Russia are about 1 in 155.
The best protection for U.S. interests in the world's oceans is the U.S. Navy, which should not and must not be subject to orders or regulations made by paper pushers in the International Seabed Authority or rulings of the International Court of Justice. U.S. access to the high seas, as well as freedom of the seas for all countries, is best protected by a great U.S. Navy, not a U.N. bureaucracy financed by a global tax.
With all the critical problems facing America today, it's hard to see why President Bush is wasting whatever is left of his political capital to partner with Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., to try to get the Senate to ratify the United Nations Law of the Sea Treaty.
As chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Biden is scheduled to hold a hearing loaded with pro-treaty witnesses and then try to sneak through ratification while the public is focused on other globalism and giveaway mischief.
The Law of the Sea Treaty is the globalists' dream bill. It would put the United States in a de facto world government that rules all the world's oceans under the pretense that they belong to "the common heritage of mankind." That's global-speak for allowing the United Nations and its affiliated organizations to carry out a massive, unprecedented redistribution of wealth from the United States to other countries.
The treaty has already been ratified by 155 countries. Most of them no doubt expect corrupt U.N. bureaucrats to divvy up the riches at the bottom of the sea, which will be brought to the surface by U.S. investment and technology, and parcel them out to Third World dictators to support themselves in the lavish style to which they would like to become accustomed.
Why must those who believe in American sovereignty have to keep fighting the same battles over and over again? President Ronald Reagan rejected the Law of the Sea Treaty in 1982, not because of picky details in the text, but because the treaty would put the United States in the clutches of a supranational ruling clique.
The argument is being made that Reagan's objections were "fixed" in 1994. That's a sham because no one country can legally change the terms of a treaty that has already been signed and ratified by more than 100 countries, and 25 countries have not agreed to the 1994 changes anyway.
Furthermore, changing a few details of the treaty does nothing to address the massive loss of U.S. sovereignty, which Reagan and other Americans found impudent and obnoxious.
The treaty has already created the International Seabed Authority and given it total jurisdiction over all the oceans and everything in them, including "solid, liquid or gaseous mineral resources." The treaty even gives the Authority something U.N. bureaucrats have lusted after for years: the authority to impose international taxes (disguised by euphemisms such as fees and royalties).
The treaty would subject our governmental, military and business operations to mandatory dispute resolution by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg, Germany. If you think activist judges in the United States are out of control, wait until you try your case before this U.N. tribunal, whose decisions cannot be appealed.
Because several U.S. Supreme Court justices are on record as using, and urging others to use, foreign law in deciding U.S. cases, the treaty would be an open invitation to activist judges in the U.S. to interpret the treaty's purposely vague provisions. Liberal U.S. judges might even develop the theory that the treaty is "evolving" (like liberal notions about the U.S. Constitution), so that liberal social and, especially, environmental biases could be written into U.S. laws.
All Law of the Sea Treaty agencies are U.N. organizations, and the U.N. secretary general plays an important role in administering the treaty. With the U.N.'s shocking track record of corruption, it makes no sense to give it a new infusion of power and money.
The Bush administration argues that the United States needs the treaty to protect U.S. interests in the world's oceans and to ensure that the U.S. Navy can go where it needs to go. The problem with that argument is that if the U.S. signs and ratifies the treaty, America will be bound to abide by its decisions.
Based on U.S. experience in other international organizations such as the World Trade Organization, decisions will usually be contrary to U.S. security and economic interests. The U.S. Navy can already go wherever it needs to go, and it should remain that way.
One of the silliest arguments is that the U.S. needs the treaty to guard against Russian claims to the North Pole and its oil riches. If the United States ratifies the treaty, America would have to accept the treaty tribunal's decision.
Even though the United States already has valid claims to the North Pole region under the Doctrine of Discovery, the chances of the treaty bureaucrats ruling for the U.S. against Russia are about 1 in 155.
The best protection for U.S. interests in the world's oceans is the U.S. Navy, which should not and must not be subject to orders or regulations made by paper pushers in the International Seabed Authority or rulings of the International Court of Justice. U.S. access to the high seas, as well as freedom of the seas for all countries, is best protected by a great U.S. Navy, not a U.N. bureaucracy financed by a global tax.
Mexican official urges North American Union
Mexican official urges North American Union
Tells Denver trade conference EU is 'model we need to follow quickly'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 21, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Michael Howe
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Mayor Evaristo Lenin Perez of Ciudad Acuna, Mexico
At a Denver conference on intercontinental trade corridors, a Mexican mayor called for a swift move toward a European Union-style merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
Referring to Europe, Evaristo Lenin Perez of Ciudad Acuna – a sister city of Del Rio, Texas – told the Great Plains International Conference, "It's a model we need to follow quickly."
Perez later told WND, "If only people know the benefits of opening the borders and working together, improving the quality of life for all, then no one would be opposed to the idea of a North American Union."
A spokesman for organizers of the conference – which began Wednesday and concludes today – rejected the Mexican mayor's view.
"This is not what the conference is about, it is not about a North American Union," said Joe Kiely, vice president of the Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition. "It is about developing infrastructure and economic opportunities in the Great Plains. I am equally surprised the other items were brought up here."
Ports-to-Plains describes itself as "a planned, multimodal transportation corridor including a multi-lane divided highway that will facilitate the efficient transportation of goods and services from Mexico, through West Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Oklahoma, and ultimately on into Canada and the Pacific Northwest."
The conference, held at the Adams Mark Hotel, is promoted as an opportunity to "highlight the efforts of communities and citizens working together to bring the benefits of investment in transportation infrastructure and trade home to the Great Plains region."
Asked why he chose the conference to promote the idea of a North American Union, Perez told WND, "It's as good as any place and the right people are here."
"This is not a new idea," he said. "In fact when there are border meetings between border governors or border legislatures this is a topic that continually comes up."
Perez also affirmed the Ports to Plains Corridor is basically a NAFTA Superhighway and needs to be developed as such.
"We need to begin by building the infrastructure in the three countries, investing in Mexico, and then we can sell the main idea that Mexicans should stay in Mexico. We just need to create an equal level for all," Perez said.
Del Rio, Texas, Mayor Efrain Valdes told conferees he came to build relationships he hopes will last for decades to come.
"We are all North Americans," he said. "Three countries, but we are all North Americans."
Michael Reeves, president of Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition, kicked off the conference with brief remarks.
Eduardo Arnal, consulate general of Mexico in Denver, later provided numerous statistics documenting the strong economic relationship between Mexico and the U.S.
"Because of NAFTA, we are partners in the fight against terror and need to help ensure each other's safety," Arnal said.
Arnal later discussed with WND the relationship between Mexico and the U.S. and the issue of illegal immigration.
"The best and only way to stop illegal immigration is for the United States to invest in Mexico," he said. "A fence will not work. It's a simple equation of supply and demand – Mexicans go to the U.S. for work because the demand for their labor and wages is there."
Arnal said although Mexico must share responsibility for the immigration issue, it is the U.S. that really needs to step up and begin investing more in Mexico to help bring the country to a level playing field.
The Canadian perspective was delivered by Phillippe Taillon, vice consul and trade commissioner of the Canadian Consulate in Denver. Like his Mexican counterpart, Taillon presented statistics on the relationship between the three countries and told the crowd "NAFTA has been hugely profitable for all three countries."
He also expressed an interest in continuing to integrate rail, truck and air transportation networks as Canada looks to open new markets from Asia.
Tells Denver trade conference EU is 'model we need to follow quickly'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 21, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Michael Howe
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Mayor Evaristo Lenin Perez of Ciudad Acuna, Mexico
At a Denver conference on intercontinental trade corridors, a Mexican mayor called for a swift move toward a European Union-style merger of the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
Referring to Europe, Evaristo Lenin Perez of Ciudad Acuna – a sister city of Del Rio, Texas – told the Great Plains International Conference, "It's a model we need to follow quickly."
Perez later told WND, "If only people know the benefits of opening the borders and working together, improving the quality of life for all, then no one would be opposed to the idea of a North American Union."
A spokesman for organizers of the conference – which began Wednesday and concludes today – rejected the Mexican mayor's view.
"This is not what the conference is about, it is not about a North American Union," said Joe Kiely, vice president of the Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition. "It is about developing infrastructure and economic opportunities in the Great Plains. I am equally surprised the other items were brought up here."
Ports-to-Plains describes itself as "a planned, multimodal transportation corridor including a multi-lane divided highway that will facilitate the efficient transportation of goods and services from Mexico, through West Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, and Oklahoma, and ultimately on into Canada and the Pacific Northwest."
The conference, held at the Adams Mark Hotel, is promoted as an opportunity to "highlight the efforts of communities and citizens working together to bring the benefits of investment in transportation infrastructure and trade home to the Great Plains region."
Asked why he chose the conference to promote the idea of a North American Union, Perez told WND, "It's as good as any place and the right people are here."
"This is not a new idea," he said. "In fact when there are border meetings between border governors or border legislatures this is a topic that continually comes up."
Perez also affirmed the Ports to Plains Corridor is basically a NAFTA Superhighway and needs to be developed as such.
"We need to begin by building the infrastructure in the three countries, investing in Mexico, and then we can sell the main idea that Mexicans should stay in Mexico. We just need to create an equal level for all," Perez said.
Del Rio, Texas, Mayor Efrain Valdes told conferees he came to build relationships he hopes will last for decades to come.
"We are all North Americans," he said. "Three countries, but we are all North Americans."
Michael Reeves, president of Ports-to-Plains Trade Corridor Coalition, kicked off the conference with brief remarks.
Eduardo Arnal, consulate general of Mexico in Denver, later provided numerous statistics documenting the strong economic relationship between Mexico and the U.S.
"Because of NAFTA, we are partners in the fight against terror and need to help ensure each other's safety," Arnal said.
Arnal later discussed with WND the relationship between Mexico and the U.S. and the issue of illegal immigration.
"The best and only way to stop illegal immigration is for the United States to invest in Mexico," he said. "A fence will not work. It's a simple equation of supply and demand – Mexicans go to the U.S. for work because the demand for their labor and wages is there."
Arnal said although Mexico must share responsibility for the immigration issue, it is the U.S. that really needs to step up and begin investing more in Mexico to help bring the country to a level playing field.
The Canadian perspective was delivered by Phillippe Taillon, vice consul and trade commissioner of the Canadian Consulate in Denver. Like his Mexican counterpart, Taillon presented statistics on the relationship between the three countries and told the crowd "NAFTA has been hugely profitable for all three countries."
He also expressed an interest in continuing to integrate rail, truck and air transportation networks as Canada looks to open new markets from Asia.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
WND banned from secret meeting on selling U.S. assets
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57717
WND banned from secret meeting on selling U.S. assets
'We don't feel news site is appropriate for a business conference'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 19, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
EuroMoney PLC, the UK-based company that arranges dozens of financial conferences around the world each year, has refused to allow WND staff reporter Jerome Corsi to attend next week's "North American PPP (Public-Private Partnership) & Infrastructure Finance Conference" in New York, even though WND offered to pay the $1,999 conference fee required to attend.
"When government officials want to go behind closed doors with investment bankers and lawyers to discuss selling our public infrastructure to foreign investment leaders, investigative reporters need to be there to tell the public what is really going on," Corsi said.
"Why is it that all these PPP and SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership) meetings are behind closed doors," Corsi asked, "and government officials and their supporters think that's normal? But when investigative reporters want to attend and report on what is being said, we are the ones who get accused of being the conspiracy theorists?"
"By refusing to allow WND to attend as a paying customer," Corsi argued, "EuroMoney is telling the American public that they intend to conduct a secret meeting designed to teach government officials how to sell out U.S. public infrastructure to foreign investment concerns.
"I'm sure we will all be told that EuroMoney seminars and PPP structures are really for our 'security and prosperity,' just as President Bush asserts for the SPP itself," Corsi continued. "Evidently we are just supposed to close our eyes and trust government officials, investment bankers and international lawyers, putting aside national security concerns and other economic issues which we believe may be of concern to our readers."
According to the conference brochure, the purpose of the EuroMoney seminar is to teach state and local government officials in the U.S. how to lease a wide range of public assets to international and foreign private investment groups.
"Your online news service is known for its political rather than business content," EuroMoney's Joanna Johnson explained yesterday to WND in an e-mail, while refusing to allow Corsi permission to attend the conference. "We don't feel it's appropriate for a business conference."
In an Aug. 29 e-mail, Johnson told WND the seminar was "only open to those who are internal to EuroMoney or those with whom we have a media partnership. In this instance I am unable to extend a press pass to your organization."
WND then offered to pay the full registration fee for Corsi, the author of "The Late, Great USA" which uses government documents to outline plans for a continental merger, to attend.
In response, Johnson sent a second Aug. 29 e-mail asking WND for payment details and confirming Corsi could attend, provided WND paid the full registration fee as offered.
Yesterday's e-mail shutting the door to Corsi came after WND pressed EuroMoney to send an invoice.
"So, EuroMoney made a political decision to keep me out of their private meeting," Corsi commented, "but WND is the one EuroMoney objects to as being too political. Seems to me like a case of guilty conscience where EuroMoney is accusing WND of a fault EuroMoney knows itself to be committing."
Public-private partnerships, or PPPs, were authorized by Executive Order No. 12803 President George H.W. Bush signed April 30, 1992, clearing federal barriers for cities and states to lease public works infrastructures to private investors.
Writing in WND, Corsi has repeatedly exposed the PPP structure the Texas Department of Transportation has used to allow Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, a foreign investment consortium in Spain, to finance the Trans-Texas Corridor, retaining for Cintra resulting rights to operate and receive tolls from TTC superhighways for 50 years after completion.
Corsi first exposed the EuroMoney seminar agenda in an article published in WND on Jan. 5, discussing an earlier EuroMoney seminar on PPP financing of public infrastructure projects scheduled for Miami in March, entitled "PPP: The North American Private Partnerships Intensive Seminar."
"This is an outrageous affront to freedom of the press," Corsi said, "but it affirms the government officials and investment bankers who are pushing PPP structures have something to hide."
The EuroMoney brochure for next week's seminar in New York indicates that attendees will include officials from the state departments of transportation in Virginia, Wisconsin, Louisiana, Texas, Delaware, Colorado and Washington, D.C.
Other attendees will be investment bankers, including managing directors from the Carlyle Group, Nuveen Asset Management, Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, AIG Highstar, Allstate Investments and Morgan Stanley.
The brochure names David Narefsky as the workshop leader.
Narefsky is listed as a partner in the Government Practice Group of the law firm Mayer, Brown, Row, and Maw, an international law firm that "has been counsel in the major privatizing transactions that have been completed or are now under way in the United States, including the Chicago Skyway, the Indiana Toll Road and Chicago-Midway Airport."
The brochure further notes that Narefsky has played "a leading role in these transactions," crediting Narefsky as being "actively involved in the drafting and analysis of PPP legislation for various state and local jurisdictions."
In the Jan. 5 WND article, Corsi reported a spokesman for EuroMoney in the UK told WND the target office was government employees at the state and local level who want to learn the "how-to" of putting deals together such as the one by Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte to finance the Trans-Texas Corridor.
The EuroMoney seminar brochure notes a director of Cintra from Spain is scheduled to attend the conference and speak to the attendees.
Panels at the New York seminar are scheduled to discuss the Trans-Texas Corridor, taking up such topics as "Is the politics a knee-jerk or a ground swell?" "Reviewing current activity in the state legislature," "What will the effect be on different states and the industry in general?" "Will Texas deals get through the instability?" and "What does this mean for equity partners?”
WND has reported Texas Gov. Rick Perry has vetoed a series of laws passed overwhelming by the Texas legislature with the intent of blocking TTC superhighway construction altogether, or at a minimum placing a two-year moratorium on the project.
The 300 senior decision-makers from state government, investment banking, and legal counsel that Money expects to attend the New York meeting will hear seminars instructing them how to create private finance deals on public infrastructure projects including toll roads, water treatment and waste management facilities, port infrastructure, state lotteries, airports, municipal parking, and military housing developments.
"The complex nature of politics in North America has led to challenges for financiers, investors and contractors in convincing all from local to national levels that PPP is an accountable and credible form of public finance," the EuroMoney conference brochure notes. "Moreover, on an electoral level, those in the public sector that have pushed for such solutions have often had to fight hard to gain public acceptance. What is clear is that to push projects through, strong leadership is needed, along with effective communication and an increasingly credible history of procurement success."
The conference chairman is scheduled to be Tom Nelthorpe, the editor of Project Finance Magazine, a EuroMoney publication promoting private investment structures in public infrastructure deals.
WND banned from secret meeting on selling U.S. assets
'We don't feel news site is appropriate for a business conference'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 19, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
EuroMoney PLC, the UK-based company that arranges dozens of financial conferences around the world each year, has refused to allow WND staff reporter Jerome Corsi to attend next week's "North American PPP (Public-Private Partnership) & Infrastructure Finance Conference" in New York, even though WND offered to pay the $1,999 conference fee required to attend.
"When government officials want to go behind closed doors with investment bankers and lawyers to discuss selling our public infrastructure to foreign investment leaders, investigative reporters need to be there to tell the public what is really going on," Corsi said.
"Why is it that all these PPP and SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership) meetings are behind closed doors," Corsi asked, "and government officials and their supporters think that's normal? But when investigative reporters want to attend and report on what is being said, we are the ones who get accused of being the conspiracy theorists?"
"By refusing to allow WND to attend as a paying customer," Corsi argued, "EuroMoney is telling the American public that they intend to conduct a secret meeting designed to teach government officials how to sell out U.S. public infrastructure to foreign investment concerns.
"I'm sure we will all be told that EuroMoney seminars and PPP structures are really for our 'security and prosperity,' just as President Bush asserts for the SPP itself," Corsi continued. "Evidently we are just supposed to close our eyes and trust government officials, investment bankers and international lawyers, putting aside national security concerns and other economic issues which we believe may be of concern to our readers."
According to the conference brochure, the purpose of the EuroMoney seminar is to teach state and local government officials in the U.S. how to lease a wide range of public assets to international and foreign private investment groups.
"Your online news service is known for its political rather than business content," EuroMoney's Joanna Johnson explained yesterday to WND in an e-mail, while refusing to allow Corsi permission to attend the conference. "We don't feel it's appropriate for a business conference."
In an Aug. 29 e-mail, Johnson told WND the seminar was "only open to those who are internal to EuroMoney or those with whom we have a media partnership. In this instance I am unable to extend a press pass to your organization."
WND then offered to pay the full registration fee for Corsi, the author of "The Late, Great USA" which uses government documents to outline plans for a continental merger, to attend.
In response, Johnson sent a second Aug. 29 e-mail asking WND for payment details and confirming Corsi could attend, provided WND paid the full registration fee as offered.
Yesterday's e-mail shutting the door to Corsi came after WND pressed EuroMoney to send an invoice.
"So, EuroMoney made a political decision to keep me out of their private meeting," Corsi commented, "but WND is the one EuroMoney objects to as being too political. Seems to me like a case of guilty conscience where EuroMoney is accusing WND of a fault EuroMoney knows itself to be committing."
Public-private partnerships, or PPPs, were authorized by Executive Order No. 12803 President George H.W. Bush signed April 30, 1992, clearing federal barriers for cities and states to lease public works infrastructures to private investors.
Writing in WND, Corsi has repeatedly exposed the PPP structure the Texas Department of Transportation has used to allow Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte, a foreign investment consortium in Spain, to finance the Trans-Texas Corridor, retaining for Cintra resulting rights to operate and receive tolls from TTC superhighways for 50 years after completion.
Corsi first exposed the EuroMoney seminar agenda in an article published in WND on Jan. 5, discussing an earlier EuroMoney seminar on PPP financing of public infrastructure projects scheduled for Miami in March, entitled "PPP: The North American Private Partnerships Intensive Seminar."
"This is an outrageous affront to freedom of the press," Corsi said, "but it affirms the government officials and investment bankers who are pushing PPP structures have something to hide."
The EuroMoney brochure for next week's seminar in New York indicates that attendees will include officials from the state departments of transportation in Virginia, Wisconsin, Louisiana, Texas, Delaware, Colorado and Washington, D.C.
Other attendees will be investment bankers, including managing directors from the Carlyle Group, Nuveen Asset Management, Goldman Sachs, Credit Suisse, AIG Highstar, Allstate Investments and Morgan Stanley.
The brochure names David Narefsky as the workshop leader.
Narefsky is listed as a partner in the Government Practice Group of the law firm Mayer, Brown, Row, and Maw, an international law firm that "has been counsel in the major privatizing transactions that have been completed or are now under way in the United States, including the Chicago Skyway, the Indiana Toll Road and Chicago-Midway Airport."
The brochure further notes that Narefsky has played "a leading role in these transactions," crediting Narefsky as being "actively involved in the drafting and analysis of PPP legislation for various state and local jurisdictions."
In the Jan. 5 WND article, Corsi reported a spokesman for EuroMoney in the UK told WND the target office was government employees at the state and local level who want to learn the "how-to" of putting deals together such as the one by Cintra Concesiones de Infraestructuras de Transporte to finance the Trans-Texas Corridor.
The EuroMoney seminar brochure notes a director of Cintra from Spain is scheduled to attend the conference and speak to the attendees.
Panels at the New York seminar are scheduled to discuss the Trans-Texas Corridor, taking up such topics as "Is the politics a knee-jerk or a ground swell?" "Reviewing current activity in the state legislature," "What will the effect be on different states and the industry in general?" "Will Texas deals get through the instability?" and "What does this mean for equity partners?”
WND has reported Texas Gov. Rick Perry has vetoed a series of laws passed overwhelming by the Texas legislature with the intent of blocking TTC superhighway construction altogether, or at a minimum placing a two-year moratorium on the project.
The 300 senior decision-makers from state government, investment banking, and legal counsel that Money expects to attend the New York meeting will hear seminars instructing them how to create private finance deals on public infrastructure projects including toll roads, water treatment and waste management facilities, port infrastructure, state lotteries, airports, municipal parking, and military housing developments.
"The complex nature of politics in North America has led to challenges for financiers, investors and contractors in convincing all from local to national levels that PPP is an accountable and credible form of public finance," the EuroMoney conference brochure notes. "Moreover, on an electoral level, those in the public sector that have pushed for such solutions have often had to fight hard to gain public acceptance. What is clear is that to push projects through, strong leadership is needed, along with effective communication and an increasingly credible history of procurement success."
The conference chairman is scheduled to be Tom Nelthorpe, the editor of Project Finance Magazine, a EuroMoney publication promoting private investment structures in public infrastructure deals.
Terrorists disclose: We LOVE liberals!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57716
Terrorists disclose: We LOVE liberals!
Jihadists respond to Rosie, Clinton, Penn, Pelosi, Fonda, Boxer, Murtha
Posted: September 19, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Klein, left, with the senior West Bank leadership of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, including Ala Senakreh, second from left, the terror group's West Bank chief. The Brigades took responsibility together with the Islamic Jihad terror group for every suicide bombing in Israel the past three years. The Brigades, the most active West Bank terror group, also carried out hundreds of shootings and rocket attacks.
Many analysts and commentators have speculated what America's enemies might think about liberal politicians, celebrities and activists who protest the war in Iraq, call terrorists "freedom fighters," express solidarity with terror-supporting countries or even question who was behind the 9/11 attacks.
In a shocking new book, author and WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein actually petitions Muslim terrorists to respond to the statements and actions of American public figures such as anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Rep. John Murtha, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and entertainment personalities Rosie O'Donnell, Sean Penn and Jane Fonda. The jihadists overwhelmingly applauded the liberal leaders.
In "Schmoozing with Terrorists: From Hollywood to the Holy Land Jihadists Reveal their Global Plans – to a Jew!," Klein in one chapter assembles a panel of senior terrorist leaders and asks them to sound off about high-profile liberals. He also asks about conservative personalities from Ronald Reagan through Rush Limbaugh.
The terrorists were familiar with some of the names, while for others the jihadists were provided with a series of statements and speeches to which to respond.
Klein, for example, had a speech made earlier this year by Penn translated into Arabic. In the speech, Penn, who in 2005 paid a solidarity visit to Tehran, called Iran a "great country," slammed President Bush and Vice President Cheney as "villainous and criminally obscene people" and suggested Iran had the right to obtain a nuclear weapon since the U.S. has a nuclear arsenal.
In "Schmoozing" Klein also read to the terrorists statements from O'Donnell in which she argued terrorists are people, too.
"Don't fear the terrorists. They're mothers and fathers," said O’Donnell.
The former daytime talk host also has raised questions about whether al-Qaida was responsible for 9/11; implied the Iranian seizure of 15 British sailors in March was a hoax to provide Bush with an excuse to attack Tehran; and doubted whether confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed really planned the attacks.
Klein discussed with the terrorists demands for a quick U.S. withdrawal from Iraq by politicians such as Boxer and Murtha.
He asked jihadists what they thought of Pelosi's visit last April against the recommendations of the White House to meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Klein with Eiman Abu Eita, chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Beit Sahour
During a photo opportunity, a smiling Pelosi stated, "We came in friendship, hope and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace."
Syria openly hosts Palestinian terrorist leaders, signed a military alliance with Iran and is accused of arming and funding the Lebanese Hezbollah terror group and aiding the insurgency against U.S. troops in Iraq.
Klein also read to the terrorists speeches and statements by Sheehan, who has called terrorists "freedom fighters" and has accused Bush of waging war in Iraq for Israeli interests.
Why schmooze with the professed enemies of Western civilization?
States Klein: "In the midst of America's war on terror, in the midst of our grand showdown with Islamofascism, with our boys and girls deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the world to defend liberty, it is crucial for all of us to understand the adversary we are up against and how some of our policies and personalities are emboldening the terrorists to think they are winning."
Klein explains he believes America is in trouble. While the U.S. has made enormous advances in the war on terror the past few years, it is encouraging terrorists to attack, and people don't even know it, he professes.
Klein with Muhammad Abu Tir, the No. 2 Hamas leader in the West Bank, suspected of attempting to poison Israel's water supply
"If the American approach to identifying, understanding, and dealing with terrorism is not re-examined in the very near future, if we don't immediately begin to understand how the terrorists think and respond to our policies, we face a devastating reality, with global jihad beating down our doorstep before we even realize what happened," states Klein.
Among the highlights of "Schmoozing with Terrorists:"
Madonna and Britney Spears stoned to death? What life in the U.S. would be like if the terrorists win.
Jihadists list their U.S. election favorites, mouth off about politicians and even threaten to kill one 2008 presidential candidate.
Klein and friends confront well-armed senior terrorists about whether suicide bombers really get 72 virgins after their deadly operation.
A shocking expose on how YOUR tax dollars fund terrorism!
Bibles used as toilet paper, synagogues as rocket launching zones? Meet the leaders of the most notorious holy site desecrations in history.
The under-reported story of Christian persecution in the Middle East as told by the antagonists and victims.
Terrorists offer tips on how to win the war on terror!
Klein has been interviewing terrorists since age 19, when he spent a weekend with a group connected to al-Qaida. He reports daily from Israel, going where many of his media colleagues dare not tread.
Klein is known for his regular appearances and segments on top American radio programs, where he has many times interviewed terrorists live on air. He served as a co-host of the national "John Batchelor Show," currently on hiatus.
The oldest of 10 children, Klein attended Jewish schools from kindergarten through college at Yeshiva University in New York, where he served as editor-in-chief of the undergraduate student newspaper.
To interview Aaron Klein, contact M. Sliwa Public Relations by e-mail, or call 973-272-2861 or 212-202-4453.
Terrorists disclose: We LOVE liberals!
Jihadists respond to Rosie, Clinton, Penn, Pelosi, Fonda, Boxer, Murtha
Posted: September 19, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
Klein, left, with the senior West Bank leadership of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, including Ala Senakreh, second from left, the terror group's West Bank chief. The Brigades took responsibility together with the Islamic Jihad terror group for every suicide bombing in Israel the past three years. The Brigades, the most active West Bank terror group, also carried out hundreds of shootings and rocket attacks.
Many analysts and commentators have speculated what America's enemies might think about liberal politicians, celebrities and activists who protest the war in Iraq, call terrorists "freedom fighters," express solidarity with terror-supporting countries or even question who was behind the 9/11 attacks.
In a shocking new book, author and WND Jerusalem bureau chief Aaron Klein actually petitions Muslim terrorists to respond to the statements and actions of American public figures such as anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan, Sen. Hillary Clinton, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Rep. John Murtha, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and entertainment personalities Rosie O'Donnell, Sean Penn and Jane Fonda. The jihadists overwhelmingly applauded the liberal leaders.
In "Schmoozing with Terrorists: From Hollywood to the Holy Land Jihadists Reveal their Global Plans – to a Jew!," Klein in one chapter assembles a panel of senior terrorist leaders and asks them to sound off about high-profile liberals. He also asks about conservative personalities from Ronald Reagan through Rush Limbaugh.
The terrorists were familiar with some of the names, while for others the jihadists were provided with a series of statements and speeches to which to respond.
Klein, for example, had a speech made earlier this year by Penn translated into Arabic. In the speech, Penn, who in 2005 paid a solidarity visit to Tehran, called Iran a "great country," slammed President Bush and Vice President Cheney as "villainous and criminally obscene people" and suggested Iran had the right to obtain a nuclear weapon since the U.S. has a nuclear arsenal.
In "Schmoozing" Klein also read to the terrorists statements from O'Donnell in which she argued terrorists are people, too.
"Don't fear the terrorists. They're mothers and fathers," said O’Donnell.
The former daytime talk host also has raised questions about whether al-Qaida was responsible for 9/11; implied the Iranian seizure of 15 British sailors in March was a hoax to provide Bush with an excuse to attack Tehran; and doubted whether confessed 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed really planned the attacks.
Klein discussed with the terrorists demands for a quick U.S. withdrawal from Iraq by politicians such as Boxer and Murtha.
He asked jihadists what they thought of Pelosi's visit last April against the recommendations of the White House to meet with Syrian President Bashar Assad.
Klein with Eiman Abu Eita, chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Beit Sahour
During a photo opportunity, a smiling Pelosi stated, "We came in friendship, hope and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace."
Syria openly hosts Palestinian terrorist leaders, signed a military alliance with Iran and is accused of arming and funding the Lebanese Hezbollah terror group and aiding the insurgency against U.S. troops in Iraq.
Klein also read to the terrorists speeches and statements by Sheehan, who has called terrorists "freedom fighters" and has accused Bush of waging war in Iraq for Israeli interests.
Why schmooze with the professed enemies of Western civilization?
States Klein: "In the midst of America's war on terror, in the midst of our grand showdown with Islamofascism, with our boys and girls deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan and around the world to defend liberty, it is crucial for all of us to understand the adversary we are up against and how some of our policies and personalities are emboldening the terrorists to think they are winning."
Klein explains he believes America is in trouble. While the U.S. has made enormous advances in the war on terror the past few years, it is encouraging terrorists to attack, and people don't even know it, he professes.
Klein with Muhammad Abu Tir, the No. 2 Hamas leader in the West Bank, suspected of attempting to poison Israel's water supply
"If the American approach to identifying, understanding, and dealing with terrorism is not re-examined in the very near future, if we don't immediately begin to understand how the terrorists think and respond to our policies, we face a devastating reality, with global jihad beating down our doorstep before we even realize what happened," states Klein.
Among the highlights of "Schmoozing with Terrorists:"
Madonna and Britney Spears stoned to death? What life in the U.S. would be like if the terrorists win.
Jihadists list their U.S. election favorites, mouth off about politicians and even threaten to kill one 2008 presidential candidate.
Klein and friends confront well-armed senior terrorists about whether suicide bombers really get 72 virgins after their deadly operation.
A shocking expose on how YOUR tax dollars fund terrorism!
Bibles used as toilet paper, synagogues as rocket launching zones? Meet the leaders of the most notorious holy site desecrations in history.
The under-reported story of Christian persecution in the Middle East as told by the antagonists and victims.
Terrorists offer tips on how to win the war on terror!
Klein has been interviewing terrorists since age 19, when he spent a weekend with a group connected to al-Qaida. He reports daily from Israel, going where many of his media colleagues dare not tread.
Klein is known for his regular appearances and segments on top American radio programs, where he has many times interviewed terrorists live on air. He served as a co-host of the national "John Batchelor Show," currently on hiatus.
The oldest of 10 children, Klein attended Jewish schools from kindergarten through college at Yeshiva University in New York, where he served as editor-in-chief of the undergraduate student newspaper.
To interview Aaron Klein, contact M. Sliwa Public Relations by e-mail, or call 973-272-2861 or 212-202-4453.
Experts say terrorists eye your local school
Experts say terrorists eye your local school
3 years after Beslan slaughter, U.S. educators still unprepared
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
WASHINGTON – Three years after Muslim terrorists attacked a school in Beslan in North Ossetia-Alania within the Russian Federation resulting in 396 deaths and 437 injuries, terrorism and law enforcement experts say most U.S. schools have not prepared at all to deal with the possibility of such an assault.
More disturbingly, they say, such attacks are most definitely being prepared and rehearsed in Islamic terrorist camps around the world.
In videotapes captured in Afghanistan, al-Qaida terrorists practiced the takeover of a school – issuing commands in English, separating children into manageable groups and killing anyone who offered resistance. Some hostages were take to rooftops, dangled over the edge, then shot for the sake of cameras and onlookers.
In Iraq, the floor plans of several schools in Virginia, Texas and New Jersey were found in the possession of captured terrorists.
Meanwhile, in the U.S. law enforcement authorities have uncovered what appear to be probing missions by terrorists attempting to get jobs as school bus drivers and making inquiries about armed security personnel in schools.
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman has been attempting to get local law enforcement training for what he considers to be these inevitable attacks in the future. He points out how U.S. schools all have regular fire drills despite the fact that not one child has been killed by fire in an American school in the last 25 years.
"We need to treat the threat of violence like the threat of fire," he tells those willing to listen.
Grossman and Todd Rassa, a trainer with the SigArms Academy, say the most likely targets of terrorist attacks in the U.S. are rural schools where response time by law enforcement is slow. The targets will probably be in states "with no concealed-carry laws and no hunting culture" and in communities where police do not have rifles.
Even though they say U.S. law enforcement can learn much about such attacks by studying Beslan, attacks in the U.S. will probably be different in some ways.
Some 100 terrorists were involved in that attack, nearly half of them embedded in a large crowd of parents, staff and children who showed up for the first day of school. Others arrived for the surprise attack in SUVs, troop carriers and bigger sedans.
Experts predict smaller groups of terrorists at any single location in the U.S. But Grossman expects simultaneous attacks at multiple school locations – at least four. Middle schools are the most likely targets because girls are old enough to rape but students are not big enough to fight back effectively.
They say the attackers will kill everyone they see – students, teachers and parents alike – as they move in to seize the school. They will plant bombs throughout buildings, while raping and murdering and throwing out bodies as they did in Beslan.
The pair of trainers say the most effective deterrent to such attacks is to ensure there is an armed presence within every school. They recommend armed security as well as encouraging teachers and administrators to carry firearms.
"Even one or two armed teachers in a school can make a difference," says Grossman. "One man or woman with effective fire from behind cover inside the school can hold off a group of attackers for five minutes."
That could be enough time for police, or other help, to get to the scene.
They say it's also important to be vigilant in watching for reconnaissance efforts by terrorists. They will never attack a target without probing it first, say the experts. This could involve photographs and videotape.
In March, the FBI and Homeland Security Department distributed a bulletin to law enforcement across the country warning that Muslims with "ties to extremist groups" are signing up to be school bus drivers. They also noted "recent suspicious activity" by foreigners who either drive school buses or are licensed to drive them.
"The enemy is infiltrating us at all levels, and certainly school bus drivers are one area to look at," warned Grossman, president of Killology Research Group, an anti-terror consultancy that trains the FBI and other law enforcement. "And how about high school, middle school and elementary school cafeteria workers? Janitors? Delivery people?"
Grossman believes some of those involved with future terrorist attacks on U.S. schools are already working inside the system – scoping out their targets.
"Islamic terrorists are already in place in the U.S. and, yes, that includes bus drivers, cafeteria workers and also airport workers," said Grossman, a former Army Ranger and West Point professor.
Simultaneous attacks on schools in multiple states would follow Osama bin Laden's goal of crippling the U.S. economy. If multiple schools were hit, Grossman says, parents would drop out of the work force en masse to protect their children. A prolonged labor disruption would cost businesses billions of dollars in lost revenue.
The 9/11 mastermind now in custody at Gitmo recently suggested al-Qaida may be targeting school children. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed said in his confession before a military tribunal that while he may not like killing kids, they're fair game in jihad. He claims U.S. forces bombed and killed the children of bin Laden's top deputy, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, and arrested and "abused" his own children.
Recent events come on top of several other school bus-related incidents involving Mideast men that raise suspicion of terror activity.
They include last year's surprise boarding of a school bus in Tampa, Fla., by two Saudi men dressed in trench coats. Authorities suspect they were making a dry run to see how easy it would be to hijack or blow up a school bus filled with innocent American students.
Previously, an Arab man from Detroit was caught trying to obtain a job as a school bus driver in New York using fake Social Security documents.
Experts also worry about terrorists operating independently of al-Qaida. "There are many lone wolves and self-starters out there who could attack at any time," Grossman warned.
Muslim gunman Sulejman Talovic was loaded for bear in February when he opened fire on shoppers in a Salt Lake City mall. He was armed with a shotgun, a .38 pistol and a backpack full of ammunition. He killed five and would have kept killing if an alert off-duty police officer hadn't returned fire and helped stop him.
"The time may come when that one cop will have to keep several adults at bay, preventing them from prosecuting their assault plan on our kids until support arrives," said John Giduck, president of Archangel Group, an antiterror training service.
3 years after Beslan slaughter, U.S. educators still unprepared
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
WASHINGTON – Three years after Muslim terrorists attacked a school in Beslan in North Ossetia-Alania within the Russian Federation resulting in 396 deaths and 437 injuries, terrorism and law enforcement experts say most U.S. schools have not prepared at all to deal with the possibility of such an assault.
More disturbingly, they say, such attacks are most definitely being prepared and rehearsed in Islamic terrorist camps around the world.
In videotapes captured in Afghanistan, al-Qaida terrorists practiced the takeover of a school – issuing commands in English, separating children into manageable groups and killing anyone who offered resistance. Some hostages were take to rooftops, dangled over the edge, then shot for the sake of cameras and onlookers.
In Iraq, the floor plans of several schools in Virginia, Texas and New Jersey were found in the possession of captured terrorists.
Meanwhile, in the U.S. law enforcement authorities have uncovered what appear to be probing missions by terrorists attempting to get jobs as school bus drivers and making inquiries about armed security personnel in schools.
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman
Lt. Col. Dave Grossman has been attempting to get local law enforcement training for what he considers to be these inevitable attacks in the future. He points out how U.S. schools all have regular fire drills despite the fact that not one child has been killed by fire in an American school in the last 25 years.
"We need to treat the threat of violence like the threat of fire," he tells those willing to listen.
Grossman and Todd Rassa, a trainer with the SigArms Academy, say the most likely targets of terrorist attacks in the U.S. are rural schools where response time by law enforcement is slow. The targets will probably be in states "with no concealed-carry laws and no hunting culture" and in communities where police do not have rifles.
Even though they say U.S. law enforcement can learn much about such attacks by studying Beslan, attacks in the U.S. will probably be different in some ways.
Some 100 terrorists were involved in that attack, nearly half of them embedded in a large crowd of parents, staff and children who showed up for the first day of school. Others arrived for the surprise attack in SUVs, troop carriers and bigger sedans.
Experts predict smaller groups of terrorists at any single location in the U.S. But Grossman expects simultaneous attacks at multiple school locations – at least four. Middle schools are the most likely targets because girls are old enough to rape but students are not big enough to fight back effectively.
They say the attackers will kill everyone they see – students, teachers and parents alike – as they move in to seize the school. They will plant bombs throughout buildings, while raping and murdering and throwing out bodies as they did in Beslan.
The pair of trainers say the most effective deterrent to such attacks is to ensure there is an armed presence within every school. They recommend armed security as well as encouraging teachers and administrators to carry firearms.
"Even one or two armed teachers in a school can make a difference," says Grossman. "One man or woman with effective fire from behind cover inside the school can hold off a group of attackers for five minutes."
That could be enough time for police, or other help, to get to the scene.
They say it's also important to be vigilant in watching for reconnaissance efforts by terrorists. They will never attack a target without probing it first, say the experts. This could involve photographs and videotape.
In March, the FBI and Homeland Security Department distributed a bulletin to law enforcement across the country warning that Muslims with "ties to extremist groups" are signing up to be school bus drivers. They also noted "recent suspicious activity" by foreigners who either drive school buses or are licensed to drive them.
"The enemy is infiltrating us at all levels, and certainly school bus drivers are one area to look at," warned Grossman, president of Killology Research Group, an anti-terror consultancy that trains the FBI and other law enforcement. "And how about high school, middle school and elementary school cafeteria workers? Janitors? Delivery people?"
Grossman believes some of those involved with future terrorist attacks on U.S. schools are already working inside the system – scoping out their targets.
"Islamic terrorists are already in place in the U.S. and, yes, that includes bus drivers, cafeteria workers and also airport workers," said Grossman, a former Army Ranger and West Point professor.
Simultaneous attacks on schools in multiple states would follow Osama bin Laden's goal of crippling the U.S. economy. If multiple schools were hit, Grossman says, parents would drop out of the work force en masse to protect their children. A prolonged labor disruption would cost businesses billions of dollars in lost revenue.
The 9/11 mastermind now in custody at Gitmo recently suggested al-Qaida may be targeting school children. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed said in his confession before a military tribunal that while he may not like killing kids, they're fair game in jihad. He claims U.S. forces bombed and killed the children of bin Laden's top deputy, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, and arrested and "abused" his own children.
Recent events come on top of several other school bus-related incidents involving Mideast men that raise suspicion of terror activity.
They include last year's surprise boarding of a school bus in Tampa, Fla., by two Saudi men dressed in trench coats. Authorities suspect they were making a dry run to see how easy it would be to hijack or blow up a school bus filled with innocent American students.
Previously, an Arab man from Detroit was caught trying to obtain a job as a school bus driver in New York using fake Social Security documents.
Experts also worry about terrorists operating independently of al-Qaida. "There are many lone wolves and self-starters out there who could attack at any time," Grossman warned.
Muslim gunman Sulejman Talovic was loaded for bear in February when he opened fire on shoppers in a Salt Lake City mall. He was armed with a shotgun, a .38 pistol and a backpack full of ammunition. He killed five and would have kept killing if an alert off-duty police officer hadn't returned fire and helped stop him.
"The time may come when that one cop will have to keep several adults at bay, preventing them from prosecuting their assault plan on our kids until support arrives," said John Giduck, president of Archangel Group, an antiterror training service.
Muslim religion taught under guise of history
Muslim religion taught under guise of history
'Students perform skits about the tenets of Islam belief'
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
The "Five Pillars" of Islam – charity, fasting, prayer, belief and pilgrimage – are being taught to public school students in Nyssa, Ore., under the guise of world history, the school has confirmed to WND, even though a parent raised a complaint about the same teachings a year ago.
In a letter to parents following the concerns that were raised at that point, Supt. Don Grotting and other school officials told parents that the text called "Journey Across Time" features a chapter on "Islamic Civilizations."
As part of that, "class activities have included guest speakers (including an American soldier serving in Iraq and a practicing Muslim woman who is an American citizen living in Mountain Home) who talked about geography, dress, climate, religion, economy and culture and student skits, in which students prepare and perform three- to five-minute skits about the tenets of Islam belief: charity, fasting, prayer, belief, and pilgrimage."
Janine Weeks, the curriculum director at the school, this week told WND that the curriculum, and class activities, are continuing.
"We've not made any changes," she said. "The content standards require that we present information about the rise of Islam in the context of world history."
She said there are "choices" about the way students can respond to the chapter's requirements. "Perhaps one of the items might be the fact that there is a religious journey that is part of the belief system; the kids can present that in a report," she said.
However, she said she was unaware of what requirements there were for presenting the basic beliefs of any other religion, including Christianity, to students.
The McGraw-Hill book itself, according to its online outline, heavily emphasizes the positive aspects of Islam.
"Muslims were successful merchants, in part because they had a common language and a common currency. Baghdad, Cairo, and Damascus grew wealthy from trade and became important centers of learning, government, and the arts. The cities featured mosques that served as Muslim houses of worship and centers of learning. The bazaar was a very important part of the Muslim city. Although Muslims enjoyed great success and cities grew, most Muslims lived in villages and farmed," the book says.
"Muslims made valuable contributions in math, science, and the arts. Muslim scholars saved and translated the works of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Muslims are well known for their beautiful buildings. The Taj Mahal, which is made of marble and precious stone, is one of the world's most beautiful buildings," it says.
Meanwhile, in its chapter on Christianity, it notes that Christianity "attracted many followers because it gave meaning to people's lives, appealed to their emotions, and promised happiness after death."
It goes on to talk about the schism between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church that still exists.
For a student exercise, it suggests students study the American Red Cross.
In its chapter on Judaism, the book notes "the 12 tribes of Israel often quarreled, so they asked a prophet to choose a king to unite them against their enemies." Then, after World War II, "Palestine was divided into a Jewish nation called Israel."
The parent who raised the concerns a year ago, Kendalee Garner, was contacted and told WND that essentially Christianity and Judaism are not being taught. "They teach the history of Hinduism but not the tenets of its faith," she said.
"When I asked the teacher today if they were changing the curriculum she replied there is nothing we need to change," she said.
Idalia Stam, the chair of the school board, confirmed the same teaching curriculum was being used, but declined further comment on the issue.
A lawyer who has argued over such teachings in a case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court said the procedures wouldn't last 10 seconds in a public school if Christianity were being addressed.
"Would it have been 'just cultural education' if students were in simulated baptisms, wearing a crucifix, having taken the name of St. John and with praise banners saying 'Praise be to Jesus Christ' on classroom walls?" Edward White III, of the Thomas More Law Center, told WND earlier.
As WND has reported the case White handled was almost a duplicate. Teachers were having students memorize Islamic prayers, wear Islamic dress and learn to behave as a Muslim under the guise of studying history.
Some parents objected and their resulting lawsuit was turned back by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals where the opinion called it "cultural education."
The presence of such Islamic teachings is because "organized Islamists have gained control of textbook content," according to an organization that analyzes textbooks.
The American Textbook Council has concluded that the situation is the consequence of "the interplay of determined Islamic political activists, textbook editors, and multiculturally minded social studies curriculum planners."
It has gone so far that correcting the situation now becomes a problem, because "educational publishers and educational organizations have bought into claims propounded by Islamists – and have themselves become agents of misinformation."
That comes from Gilbert T. Sewall, who not only wrote the organization's report on Islam and textbooks, but also generated a response to the flood of criticism he encountered.
'Students perform skits about the tenets of Islam belief'
By Bob Unruh
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
The "Five Pillars" of Islam – charity, fasting, prayer, belief and pilgrimage – are being taught to public school students in Nyssa, Ore., under the guise of world history, the school has confirmed to WND, even though a parent raised a complaint about the same teachings a year ago.
In a letter to parents following the concerns that were raised at that point, Supt. Don Grotting and other school officials told parents that the text called "Journey Across Time" features a chapter on "Islamic Civilizations."
As part of that, "class activities have included guest speakers (including an American soldier serving in Iraq and a practicing Muslim woman who is an American citizen living in Mountain Home) who talked about geography, dress, climate, religion, economy and culture and student skits, in which students prepare and perform three- to five-minute skits about the tenets of Islam belief: charity, fasting, prayer, belief, and pilgrimage."
Janine Weeks, the curriculum director at the school, this week told WND that the curriculum, and class activities, are continuing.
"We've not made any changes," she said. "The content standards require that we present information about the rise of Islam in the context of world history."
She said there are "choices" about the way students can respond to the chapter's requirements. "Perhaps one of the items might be the fact that there is a religious journey that is part of the belief system; the kids can present that in a report," she said.
However, she said she was unaware of what requirements there were for presenting the basic beliefs of any other religion, including Christianity, to students.
The McGraw-Hill book itself, according to its online outline, heavily emphasizes the positive aspects of Islam.
"Muslims were successful merchants, in part because they had a common language and a common currency. Baghdad, Cairo, and Damascus grew wealthy from trade and became important centers of learning, government, and the arts. The cities featured mosques that served as Muslim houses of worship and centers of learning. The bazaar was a very important part of the Muslim city. Although Muslims enjoyed great success and cities grew, most Muslims lived in villages and farmed," the book says.
"Muslims made valuable contributions in math, science, and the arts. Muslim scholars saved and translated the works of the ancient Greeks and Romans. Muslims are well known for their beautiful buildings. The Taj Mahal, which is made of marble and precious stone, is one of the world's most beautiful buildings," it says.
Meanwhile, in its chapter on Christianity, it notes that Christianity "attracted many followers because it gave meaning to people's lives, appealed to their emotions, and promised happiness after death."
It goes on to talk about the schism between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church that still exists.
For a student exercise, it suggests students study the American Red Cross.
In its chapter on Judaism, the book notes "the 12 tribes of Israel often quarreled, so they asked a prophet to choose a king to unite them against their enemies." Then, after World War II, "Palestine was divided into a Jewish nation called Israel."
The parent who raised the concerns a year ago, Kendalee Garner, was contacted and told WND that essentially Christianity and Judaism are not being taught. "They teach the history of Hinduism but not the tenets of its faith," she said.
"When I asked the teacher today if they were changing the curriculum she replied there is nothing we need to change," she said.
Idalia Stam, the chair of the school board, confirmed the same teaching curriculum was being used, but declined further comment on the issue.
A lawyer who has argued over such teachings in a case that went to the U.S. Supreme Court said the procedures wouldn't last 10 seconds in a public school if Christianity were being addressed.
"Would it have been 'just cultural education' if students were in simulated baptisms, wearing a crucifix, having taken the name of St. John and with praise banners saying 'Praise be to Jesus Christ' on classroom walls?" Edward White III, of the Thomas More Law Center, told WND earlier.
As WND has reported the case White handled was almost a duplicate. Teachers were having students memorize Islamic prayers, wear Islamic dress and learn to behave as a Muslim under the guise of studying history.
Some parents objected and their resulting lawsuit was turned back by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals where the opinion called it "cultural education."
The presence of such Islamic teachings is because "organized Islamists have gained control of textbook content," according to an organization that analyzes textbooks.
The American Textbook Council has concluded that the situation is the consequence of "the interplay of determined Islamic political activists, textbook editors, and multiculturally minded social studies curriculum planners."
It has gone so far that correcting the situation now becomes a problem, because "educational publishers and educational organizations have bought into claims propounded by Islamists – and have themselves become agents of misinformation."
That comes from Gilbert T. Sewall, who not only wrote the organization's report on Islam and textbooks, but also generated a response to the flood of criticism he encountered.
LIBERAL CANADIAN MP FLIES TO AMERICA FOR TREATMENT
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070914/belinda_Stronach_070914/20070914?hub=Health
Stronach went to U.S. for cancer treatment
Liberal MP Belinda Stronach, who is battling breast cancer, travelled to California last June for an operation that was recommended as part of her treatment, says a report.
Stronach's spokesman, Greg MacEachern, told the Toronto Star that the MP for Newmarket-Aurora had a "later-stage" operation in the U.S. after a Toronto doctor referred her.
"Belinda had one of her later-stage operations in California, after referral from her personal physicians in Toronto. Prior to this, Belinda had surgery and treatment in Toronto, and continues to receive follow-up treatment there," said MacEachern.
He said speed was not the reason why she went to California.
Instead, MacEachern said the decision was made because the U.S. hospital was the best place to have it done due to the type of surgery required.
Stronach was diagnosed last spring with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The cancer is one of the more treatable forms but Stronach still required a mastectomy -- which was done in Toronto -- and breast reconstruction.
Stronach, who announced last April she would be leaving politics before the next election, paid for the surgery in the U.S., reports the Star.
"As we said back in June when we confirmed the surgery, this is a personal and private matter between Belinda, her family and her physicians. I think you'll understand that because of respect for Belinda's privacy, we refrained from offering specific details around her medical treatment," said MacEachern.
While it is rare for MPs to seek treatment outside Canada, MacEachern said Stronach was not lacking confidence in the system.
"In fact, Belinda thinks very highly of the Canadian health-care system, and uses it when needed for herself and her children, as do all Canadians. As well, her family has clearly demonstrated that support," MacEachern told the Star.
MacEachern did not offer any other details regarding what type of surgery Stronach had or what she paid for it.
SEE WHAT CANADIANS THINK!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments are now closed for this story
Frank
Leave her alone...she has cancer! If I had her money and had cancer, I'd do whatever I needed to do too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerald Skowronski
Unless the Canadian taxpayer paid for Stronach's surgery, we have no business trying to find out the details of this intensely personal situation. I may not agree with her political tactics but her personal life is her own.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathleen
I think we are forgetting that Belinda is a human being and deserves tha right to take care of herself in the best way possible. I agree with Frank... leave this woman alone. She isn't doing anything which interfers with her political office.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken
Well the optics are horrible on this politically, I agree with Frank, If it was a member of my family and I could get the care faster and more efficiently somewhere else I would not hesitate for a moment. Well not a big political fan of Ms Stronach, I wish her the best and a full and speedy recovery.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flanagan
If I had her money, I'd receive my primary care in the States too. We have been saddled with a Stalinist, second-rate system.
The best physicians and the best equipment are in the U.S.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M.B.
I had cancer and am now 'cured'... and thankful for the treatment I received in Toronto.
But going through the system here in Canada is quite the ordeal; no treatment for the 'whole person.'
Perhaps having had a taste of this, Ms. Stronach decided to go elsewhere, and hopefully will present some ideas for improvements when she returns to public life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe
She joins a lengthy list of Canadians, including politicians who go to the United States to get treated.Unfortunately, the mythology that state run medicine is superior to that of the private sector, takes precedent over the health of the individual Canadian.
Best wishes Belinda.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mary
Yes I agree. Leave her alone. Put the shoes on your feet and treat her as you would want to be treated.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grace Rankin
Best wishes, get well soon.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shawn Blankinship
Why are we giving Stronach such a tough time here? The real problem is that private healthcare cannot be sought in Canada. Two-tier health care makes sense, and would best serve the needs of Canadians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
franck
I wish her all the best God protect her.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huss R
Why not leave her alone, she has cancer. She's doing what's best for her and she's choosing on her own. As long as us, the tax payers, are not paying and shes taking it out of her own wallet..then why complain...
I hope she gets better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Royle
"Leave her alone...she has cancer! If I had her money and had cancer, I'd do whatever I needed to do too."
Of course you would .... and so would I ......... Just don't ask for my vote thats all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norma
If I had cancer I'd travel to Jupiter if I felt I could get better treatment there. Leave Brenda alone, this is a personal matter.
Brenda has long been known for doing her own thing so why the heck is everyone surprised at her going to the U.S. for treatment?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earl Robert
I believe that Belinda is still a member of Parliament but she spent her own money and for that reason we don't deserve an explanation. I hope Belinda wins her battle with cancer, and I wish EVERYONE had the same opportunity that she paid for. We should indeed leave her alone but we have the right to discuss the double standards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lori
Where and how she receives cancer treatment is irrelevant. The important thing is her recovery and good health in the future. We all do the best we can for our own health and the health of our families. Why should she be any different? I wish her the best.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kevin plemel
I do hope Belinda has a full recovery. I am not a fan of hers, but do not wish cancer on anyone. Once again, a fine example of why a blended public/private system should be created in Canada. It would go a long way in keeping our doctors and nurses here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jim
Sure she should get her treatment where she can if she is able to pay for it.
The story here isn't about those who get treatment in the states. It's about a liberal politician that is part of a political party that espoused the Canadian public system and vowed to ensure that no private health care was ever going to uspurp the current system. She is an MP for the party that relentlessly attacked the conservatives for their "hidden agenda" to privatize health care.
The irony and hypocracy is the story here. The rich get health care, the rest of use wait in line. All because of liberal fearmongering that does not allow for a real debate on the state of the health care system in Canada.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David F.
9,000 Canadian-trained doctors in the US. Why should we be surprised if some of the patients head there too? It's time for the Liberal Party to acknowledge the gorilla at the dinner table and work with the Conservatives in a non-partisan way to start thinking about fundamental changes to our health care system. This means either raising taxes to Scandinavian levels, or openly allowing privatization instead of operating in the shadows and slowly cutting services one a a time. Let the NDP scream about zero compromise on socialized medicine, time for the mainstream parties to get a grip on this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kim
While living in the USA several years ago I found a lump in my breast. I went to the doctor the next day, she had me in for a ultrasound and mam the very next day. We are now living in Canada again, this time my doctor here found a lump, she sent me to a specialist ( 10 1/2 weeks it took), still haven't had a mam. This Canadian system is scary, and needs to be fixed! I too if I had the money would seek treatment in the USA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick
I think she should have gotten all her treatment in the U.S. In fact I think anyone who can afford to go elsewhere for health treatment should do it and free up the much needed healthcare dollars, doctors, surgical rooms, recovery rooms, etc. for every one else who is not so fortunate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean
I'm no big fan of Belinda, but I would hope that the political "leaders" in this country will spare us all the grief of having this blown up into some stupid "scandal." She was referred by her doctor, she agreed and is now doing what she needs to do here in Canada. Let her rest and get better. In the meantime, the rest of the political gaggle in Ottawa should get to work and deal with IMPORTANT issues of the nation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig
Leave her alone! Belinda did what she needed to do to survive. I am sure no one who reads this article can say they would not have done the same thing if the resources were available. I am happy to hear she is getting better. Good luck!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marty
Am I missing something here??? No where in the article does it say that people are questioning her for going to the States. Relax people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.D.
SO WHAT!! I would too if I had to.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob
It's sort of been alluded to.. but I hope everyone reading this story realizes that in fact, *gasp*, we DO have a two-tiered health care system.. we have public care in Canada, and for those with LOTS of cash, we have private care in the U.S., which is quicker, and in many cases, better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike
She is just one of many politicians who whine about private medical care then when they are in need - guess what - there they go. Another Liberal MP caught living a double standard. There is nothing wrong with private medical care as long as they stop bashing it and being hypocritical about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug T
If you were in her position, you would have done the exact same thing.
I support common sense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KK
Jim, you are right. The irony and hypocrisy are the real issues in this story. Everyone wishes Belinda a fast and speedy recovery, just as everyone wishes all Canadians could have the same access to the quality of medical care and treatment she received. Unfortunately, that is not the case.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roch
Naturally everyone wishes Belinda good health, however this does point out the wealthy in Canada get better health care, a result of substandard obsolete obese medicare system which needs to be scrapped.
Canadians should not be forced to travel to U.S. to receive treatment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sara Landriault
This has nothing to do with her, it has to do with our sucky medical system. If Canada was good enough she would have stayed here. This is just more proof that the health system needs work.
I am with Belinda on this I would have gone too. Mind you I don't agree with a lot of what Belinda says in politics but in this case more power to her.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Booth
Most comments are spot-on - but one fact has been overlooked. Like Belinda, I too get my vital health care across the border. In doing so, we Canadians are contributing over a billion dollars (if not much more!) to the US economy that should have been spent here if we had choices denied us by the do-gooders. Not just for the medical treatments themselves, but the hotels, food tabs and other expenses needed to obtain our rightful and timely health care - denied us on this side of the border.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vince M.
This, in the end, is not a story about Belinda. it is a story about hypocrisy of the Liberals. The hypocrisy of (when some political gain can be made of it) defending a health system that doesn't work then going elsewhere when the chips are down.
I wish you well Belinda, but it would be nice to be able to wish the same to all the other cancer sufferers that can't afford to go to the US for treatment.
No matter how it is worded we are saddled with a system YOU think is good enough for the rest of us, just not good enough for you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul
People are commenting 'if I had money'. Well, if you do not have money in the state, you don't even get a basic treatment.
Those people who aren't covered with insurance, there is no triple bypass surgery without money. Never hear of "Yes, $100,000 US$ please." How many of the readers know people who only has provincial health care coverage? I know many. Imagine if it were private health care only system...these people would be doomed.
What if your kids just graduated living away from you, who is not under your employer coverage, require hospital stay. You'll be selling off your RRSP, borrowing money, etc. Canadian system is pretty good for the amount of taxes we pay. I personally think taxes for people who makes over $200,000 should be increased. Some may say discourage them to work harder - look at other way, it'll give opportunity to people who makes less to 'part' of the high income earner's job.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mary-Anne Brabander
As a 30 year breast cancer survivor, I am appalled at the public airing of this woman's trauma! Leave her alone! The public purse did not pay for her treatment, and we have no right to intrude in her personal battle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan
I am all for private health care inside Canada. I'm just outraged at the naked hypocrisy of this ex-politician who preached against "two-tier" embracing it when the chips are down.
Private health care in Canada now!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil
Professionals who receive their education in Canada and then go off to greener pastures are a drag on our system. Doctors (especially) and other professionals should be required to pay FULL (not government-subsidized) tuition for all of their post-secondary studies unless they sign a contract to stay in Canada for at least 10 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
chk
Belinda Stronach: The new face of the two- tiered health care system. I'm all for the two-tiered health care system - I've seen it work in Minnesota. However, as a "politician" you'd think she'd be more mindful and supportive of the health care system her party promotes. Did she also check out the homecare and palliative programs while in California? Heaven forbid she should have to endure the same delays and waiting lists that other Canadians with cancer have to put up with. Lead by example Belinda!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KP
Typical move by Belinda. What an example she is setting for the rest of the country. I have the money I can pay for better, faster health care so too bad for you poor Canadians. It is all about "ME" with her.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian
Although I personally wish her well, as a Liberal, I think she should be hammered.
How many elections have we had to endure with Liberal fearmongering about two tier health care? I just wish the Canadian electorate would wake up and see the hypocracy in the Liberal party position and get real. Two tier health care is here and always will be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian
I more than likely have skin cancer, but my appointment with a specialist is 6 months from now.
That's the status of our health system, universally avaivable to none, except for dishonest, wealthy Liberal politicians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ann
It just shows you that the rich can afford to go elsewhere for treatment. My aunt who also has cancer had to wait months to get an MRI in Canada and has a very bad case of cancer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manual
I see a lot of people on here arguing that we should leave Ms. Stronach alone, and that what she chooses to do with her own money is her own business. I agree 100% - however ordainary Canadians cannot afford to travel to the United states for faster, better hospital care and our current government-run health care monopoly denies Canadians the right to access private medical services which could possibly save their lives. We should not condemn her for looking after her health - we should condemn her for towing her party's line that no Canadian should have the right to look after their own health care, with their own money, while doing just that. Let all Canadians have the right to look after their health as they see fit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff D
Paul - you missed the whole point!
If my money is good in the US, why isn't it good in Canada? Hopefully one day the Liberals and NDP will get off the soap box and Canadians will have the opportunity to spend their after tax dollars on whatever they choose to - including additional health care, if that's what we want to do!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph
SO? What if she does go to the States? I had cancer and I too am "cured" but still have to go for minor surgery every 3 to 6 months! Luckily I had a good surgeon in TO. But now living in Northern Ontario it really is a problem. NO family Doctor, (had one but he left town)and now have to Greyhound for over two hours for a 5 minute session! Not that I could pay for medical service, but if you have the money, why not!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jake Smith
I live in Saskatchewan where you can wait six months for a catscan to figure out what's ailing you - or you can go to Alberta or North Dakota and pay a couple of hundred bucks and get one tomorrow... I suspect even the most ardent single tier health system purist would pay the cash and get the job done quick. This moves the poor fool who has no money up in the waiting line.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F Dhanani
Belinda Stronach has a medical condition and she has done what she requires to have it treated. As it is a personal matter let us leave her alone to recover. May God bless you and be beside you during your illness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Etienne
Paul writes: "...in the state, you don't even get a basic treatment." If he means "in the States," he's wrong. One reason insurance costs so much is that nobody can be turned away for health care whether they can pay or not, so Americans with insurance pick up the tab for those who don't have any - illegals, people using the emergency room as primary care, etc.
Then he writes: "Canadian system is pretty good for the amount of taxes we pay." I couldn't disagree more. I had to take my father to Cleveland for a hip replacement because he couldn't get it done here after 14 months of waiting. I had to go to the States to get a bone rebroken and reset after our system screwed it up and told me it'd be months to get it fixed. I have paid into the system for years, and it's never there when I need it.
Lastly, he writes: "I personally think taxes for people who makes over $200,000 should be increased. Some may say discourage them to work harder - look at other way, it'll give opportunity to people who makes less to 'part' of the high income earner's job." I make over $200,000 but I also work 70 hours a week. I don't think people who make less are entitled to my money, and if my taxes were to increase I'd go back to a 35-hour work week and make a lot less. It just isn't worth it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lart from Above
It's not financially efficient for every health-care function to be performed in every jurisdiction. Americans come to Canada all the time for procedures where Canada has excess or special capacity. If it's cheaper for Canada to fly one citizen to California than to build a whole operating theatre in Toronto for a new or rare treatment, then we should do what's best for taxpayers and patients. The government is responsible for ensuring health care is provided, not for deciding where each procedure should be performed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike van Lammeren
Belinda Stronach is extremely wealthy. She can travel wherever she wants and can buy whatever she wants. She can fly to Rome for lunch and Paris for supper every day of the week, if she wants. And she can fly to California and pay for medical services, if she wants.
What she can no longer do is prevent the rest of us, the little people, from paying for medical services at home, if that's what we want.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig
I think that if Belinda can get better treatment elsewhere she should go and get it done. If it is going to save her life so that she can be there for her children then so be it. We (the tax payers) are not paying for the treatment then I don't see the problem. She is not the only person that has gone to the U.S. to have treatment and I don't see anyone else being raked over the coals about it. I wish her well and a speedy recovery.
Stronach went to U.S. for cancer treatment
Liberal MP Belinda Stronach, who is battling breast cancer, travelled to California last June for an operation that was recommended as part of her treatment, says a report.
Stronach's spokesman, Greg MacEachern, told the Toronto Star that the MP for Newmarket-Aurora had a "later-stage" operation in the U.S. after a Toronto doctor referred her.
"Belinda had one of her later-stage operations in California, after referral from her personal physicians in Toronto. Prior to this, Belinda had surgery and treatment in Toronto, and continues to receive follow-up treatment there," said MacEachern.
He said speed was not the reason why she went to California.
Instead, MacEachern said the decision was made because the U.S. hospital was the best place to have it done due to the type of surgery required.
Stronach was diagnosed last spring with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The cancer is one of the more treatable forms but Stronach still required a mastectomy -- which was done in Toronto -- and breast reconstruction.
Stronach, who announced last April she would be leaving politics before the next election, paid for the surgery in the U.S., reports the Star.
"As we said back in June when we confirmed the surgery, this is a personal and private matter between Belinda, her family and her physicians. I think you'll understand that because of respect for Belinda's privacy, we refrained from offering specific details around her medical treatment," said MacEachern.
While it is rare for MPs to seek treatment outside Canada, MacEachern said Stronach was not lacking confidence in the system.
"In fact, Belinda thinks very highly of the Canadian health-care system, and uses it when needed for herself and her children, as do all Canadians. As well, her family has clearly demonstrated that support," MacEachern told the Star.
MacEachern did not offer any other details regarding what type of surgery Stronach had or what she paid for it.
SEE WHAT CANADIANS THINK!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments are now closed for this story
Frank
Leave her alone...she has cancer! If I had her money and had cancer, I'd do whatever I needed to do too.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gerald Skowronski
Unless the Canadian taxpayer paid for Stronach's surgery, we have no business trying to find out the details of this intensely personal situation. I may not agree with her political tactics but her personal life is her own.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathleen
I think we are forgetting that Belinda is a human being and deserves tha right to take care of herself in the best way possible. I agree with Frank... leave this woman alone. She isn't doing anything which interfers with her political office.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ken
Well the optics are horrible on this politically, I agree with Frank, If it was a member of my family and I could get the care faster and more efficiently somewhere else I would not hesitate for a moment. Well not a big political fan of Ms Stronach, I wish her the best and a full and speedy recovery.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flanagan
If I had her money, I'd receive my primary care in the States too. We have been saddled with a Stalinist, second-rate system.
The best physicians and the best equipment are in the U.S.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
M.B.
I had cancer and am now 'cured'... and thankful for the treatment I received in Toronto.
But going through the system here in Canada is quite the ordeal; no treatment for the 'whole person.'
Perhaps having had a taste of this, Ms. Stronach decided to go elsewhere, and hopefully will present some ideas for improvements when she returns to public life.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Joe
She joins a lengthy list of Canadians, including politicians who go to the United States to get treated.Unfortunately, the mythology that state run medicine is superior to that of the private sector, takes precedent over the health of the individual Canadian.
Best wishes Belinda.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mary
Yes I agree. Leave her alone. Put the shoes on your feet and treat her as you would want to be treated.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grace Rankin
Best wishes, get well soon.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shawn Blankinship
Why are we giving Stronach such a tough time here? The real problem is that private healthcare cannot be sought in Canada. Two-tier health care makes sense, and would best serve the needs of Canadians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
franck
I wish her all the best God protect her.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Huss R
Why not leave her alone, she has cancer. She's doing what's best for her and she's choosing on her own. As long as us, the tax payers, are not paying and shes taking it out of her own wallet..then why complain...
I hope she gets better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
John Royle
"Leave her alone...she has cancer! If I had her money and had cancer, I'd do whatever I needed to do too."
Of course you would .... and so would I ......... Just don't ask for my vote thats all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norma
If I had cancer I'd travel to Jupiter if I felt I could get better treatment there. Leave Brenda alone, this is a personal matter.
Brenda has long been known for doing her own thing so why the heck is everyone surprised at her going to the U.S. for treatment?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earl Robert
I believe that Belinda is still a member of Parliament but she spent her own money and for that reason we don't deserve an explanation. I hope Belinda wins her battle with cancer, and I wish EVERYONE had the same opportunity that she paid for. We should indeed leave her alone but we have the right to discuss the double standards.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lori
Where and how she receives cancer treatment is irrelevant. The important thing is her recovery and good health in the future. We all do the best we can for our own health and the health of our families. Why should she be any different? I wish her the best.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
kevin plemel
I do hope Belinda has a full recovery. I am not a fan of hers, but do not wish cancer on anyone. Once again, a fine example of why a blended public/private system should be created in Canada. It would go a long way in keeping our doctors and nurses here.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jim
Sure she should get her treatment where she can if she is able to pay for it.
The story here isn't about those who get treatment in the states. It's about a liberal politician that is part of a political party that espoused the Canadian public system and vowed to ensure that no private health care was ever going to uspurp the current system. She is an MP for the party that relentlessly attacked the conservatives for their "hidden agenda" to privatize health care.
The irony and hypocracy is the story here. The rich get health care, the rest of use wait in line. All because of liberal fearmongering that does not allow for a real debate on the state of the health care system in Canada.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
David F.
9,000 Canadian-trained doctors in the US. Why should we be surprised if some of the patients head there too? It's time for the Liberal Party to acknowledge the gorilla at the dinner table and work with the Conservatives in a non-partisan way to start thinking about fundamental changes to our health care system. This means either raising taxes to Scandinavian levels, or openly allowing privatization instead of operating in the shadows and slowly cutting services one a a time. Let the NDP scream about zero compromise on socialized medicine, time for the mainstream parties to get a grip on this.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kim
While living in the USA several years ago I found a lump in my breast. I went to the doctor the next day, she had me in for a ultrasound and mam the very next day. We are now living in Canada again, this time my doctor here found a lump, she sent me to a specialist ( 10 1/2 weeks it took), still haven't had a mam. This Canadian system is scary, and needs to be fixed! I too if I had the money would seek treatment in the USA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rick
I think she should have gotten all her treatment in the U.S. In fact I think anyone who can afford to go elsewhere for health treatment should do it and free up the much needed healthcare dollars, doctors, surgical rooms, recovery rooms, etc. for every one else who is not so fortunate.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean
I'm no big fan of Belinda, but I would hope that the political "leaders" in this country will spare us all the grief of having this blown up into some stupid "scandal." She was referred by her doctor, she agreed and is now doing what she needs to do here in Canada. Let her rest and get better. In the meantime, the rest of the political gaggle in Ottawa should get to work and deal with IMPORTANT issues of the nation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig
Leave her alone! Belinda did what she needed to do to survive. I am sure no one who reads this article can say they would not have done the same thing if the resources were available. I am happy to hear she is getting better. Good luck!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marty
Am I missing something here??? No where in the article does it say that people are questioning her for going to the States. Relax people.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
D.D.
SO WHAT!! I would too if I had to.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob
It's sort of been alluded to.. but I hope everyone reading this story realizes that in fact, *gasp*, we DO have a two-tiered health care system.. we have public care in Canada, and for those with LOTS of cash, we have private care in the U.S., which is quicker, and in many cases, better.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike
She is just one of many politicians who whine about private medical care then when they are in need - guess what - there they go. Another Liberal MP caught living a double standard. There is nothing wrong with private medical care as long as they stop bashing it and being hypocritical about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doug T
If you were in her position, you would have done the exact same thing.
I support common sense.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KK
Jim, you are right. The irony and hypocrisy are the real issues in this story. Everyone wishes Belinda a fast and speedy recovery, just as everyone wishes all Canadians could have the same access to the quality of medical care and treatment she received. Unfortunately, that is not the case.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roch
Naturally everyone wishes Belinda good health, however this does point out the wealthy in Canada get better health care, a result of substandard obsolete obese medicare system which needs to be scrapped.
Canadians should not be forced to travel to U.S. to receive treatment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sara Landriault
This has nothing to do with her, it has to do with our sucky medical system. If Canada was good enough she would have stayed here. This is just more proof that the health system needs work.
I am with Belinda on this I would have gone too. Mind you I don't agree with a lot of what Belinda says in politics but in this case more power to her.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Booth
Most comments are spot-on - but one fact has been overlooked. Like Belinda, I too get my vital health care across the border. In doing so, we Canadians are contributing over a billion dollars (if not much more!) to the US economy that should have been spent here if we had choices denied us by the do-gooders. Not just for the medical treatments themselves, but the hotels, food tabs and other expenses needed to obtain our rightful and timely health care - denied us on this side of the border.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vince M.
This, in the end, is not a story about Belinda. it is a story about hypocrisy of the Liberals. The hypocrisy of (when some political gain can be made of it) defending a health system that doesn't work then going elsewhere when the chips are down.
I wish you well Belinda, but it would be nice to be able to wish the same to all the other cancer sufferers that can't afford to go to the US for treatment.
No matter how it is worded we are saddled with a system YOU think is good enough for the rest of us, just not good enough for you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paul
People are commenting 'if I had money'. Well, if you do not have money in the state, you don't even get a basic treatment.
Those people who aren't covered with insurance, there is no triple bypass surgery without money. Never hear of "Yes, $100,000 US$ please." How many of the readers know people who only has provincial health care coverage? I know many. Imagine if it were private health care only system...these people would be doomed.
What if your kids just graduated living away from you, who is not under your employer coverage, require hospital stay. You'll be selling off your RRSP, borrowing money, etc. Canadian system is pretty good for the amount of taxes we pay. I personally think taxes for people who makes over $200,000 should be increased. Some may say discourage them to work harder - look at other way, it'll give opportunity to people who makes less to 'part' of the high income earner's job.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mary-Anne Brabander
As a 30 year breast cancer survivor, I am appalled at the public airing of this woman's trauma! Leave her alone! The public purse did not pay for her treatment, and we have no right to intrude in her personal battle.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dan
I am all for private health care inside Canada. I'm just outraged at the naked hypocrisy of this ex-politician who preached against "two-tier" embracing it when the chips are down.
Private health care in Canada now!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil
Professionals who receive their education in Canada and then go off to greener pastures are a drag on our system. Doctors (especially) and other professionals should be required to pay FULL (not government-subsidized) tuition for all of their post-secondary studies unless they sign a contract to stay in Canada for at least 10 years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
chk
Belinda Stronach: The new face of the two- tiered health care system. I'm all for the two-tiered health care system - I've seen it work in Minnesota. However, as a "politician" you'd think she'd be more mindful and supportive of the health care system her party promotes. Did she also check out the homecare and palliative programs while in California? Heaven forbid she should have to endure the same delays and waiting lists that other Canadians with cancer have to put up with. Lead by example Belinda!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KP
Typical move by Belinda. What an example she is setting for the rest of the country. I have the money I can pay for better, faster health care so too bad for you poor Canadians. It is all about "ME" with her.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian
Although I personally wish her well, as a Liberal, I think she should be hammered.
How many elections have we had to endure with Liberal fearmongering about two tier health care? I just wish the Canadian electorate would wake up and see the hypocracy in the Liberal party position and get real. Two tier health care is here and always will be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brian
I more than likely have skin cancer, but my appointment with a specialist is 6 months from now.
That's the status of our health system, universally avaivable to none, except for dishonest, wealthy Liberal politicians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ann
It just shows you that the rich can afford to go elsewhere for treatment. My aunt who also has cancer had to wait months to get an MRI in Canada and has a very bad case of cancer.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Manual
I see a lot of people on here arguing that we should leave Ms. Stronach alone, and that what she chooses to do with her own money is her own business. I agree 100% - however ordainary Canadians cannot afford to travel to the United states for faster, better hospital care and our current government-run health care monopoly denies Canadians the right to access private medical services which could possibly save their lives. We should not condemn her for looking after her health - we should condemn her for towing her party's line that no Canadian should have the right to look after their own health care, with their own money, while doing just that. Let all Canadians have the right to look after their health as they see fit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff D
Paul - you missed the whole point!
If my money is good in the US, why isn't it good in Canada? Hopefully one day the Liberals and NDP will get off the soap box and Canadians will have the opportunity to spend their after tax dollars on whatever they choose to - including additional health care, if that's what we want to do!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph
SO? What if she does go to the States? I had cancer and I too am "cured" but still have to go for minor surgery every 3 to 6 months! Luckily I had a good surgeon in TO. But now living in Northern Ontario it really is a problem. NO family Doctor, (had one but he left town)and now have to Greyhound for over two hours for a 5 minute session! Not that I could pay for medical service, but if you have the money, why not!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jake Smith
I live in Saskatchewan where you can wait six months for a catscan to figure out what's ailing you - or you can go to Alberta or North Dakota and pay a couple of hundred bucks and get one tomorrow... I suspect even the most ardent single tier health system purist would pay the cash and get the job done quick. This moves the poor fool who has no money up in the waiting line.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
F Dhanani
Belinda Stronach has a medical condition and she has done what she requires to have it treated. As it is a personal matter let us leave her alone to recover. May God bless you and be beside you during your illness!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Etienne
Paul writes: "...in the state, you don't even get a basic treatment." If he means "in the States," he's wrong. One reason insurance costs so much is that nobody can be turned away for health care whether they can pay or not, so Americans with insurance pick up the tab for those who don't have any - illegals, people using the emergency room as primary care, etc.
Then he writes: "Canadian system is pretty good for the amount of taxes we pay." I couldn't disagree more. I had to take my father to Cleveland for a hip replacement because he couldn't get it done here after 14 months of waiting. I had to go to the States to get a bone rebroken and reset after our system screwed it up and told me it'd be months to get it fixed. I have paid into the system for years, and it's never there when I need it.
Lastly, he writes: "I personally think taxes for people who makes over $200,000 should be increased. Some may say discourage them to work harder - look at other way, it'll give opportunity to people who makes less to 'part' of the high income earner's job." I make over $200,000 but I also work 70 hours a week. I don't think people who make less are entitled to my money, and if my taxes were to increase I'd go back to a 35-hour work week and make a lot less. It just isn't worth it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lart from Above
It's not financially efficient for every health-care function to be performed in every jurisdiction. Americans come to Canada all the time for procedures where Canada has excess or special capacity. If it's cheaper for Canada to fly one citizen to California than to build a whole operating theatre in Toronto for a new or rare treatment, then we should do what's best for taxpayers and patients. The government is responsible for ensuring health care is provided, not for deciding where each procedure should be performed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike van Lammeren
Belinda Stronach is extremely wealthy. She can travel wherever she wants and can buy whatever she wants. She can fly to Rome for lunch and Paris for supper every day of the week, if she wants. And she can fly to California and pay for medical services, if she wants.
What she can no longer do is prevent the rest of us, the little people, from paying for medical services at home, if that's what we want.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig
I think that if Belinda can get better treatment elsewhere she should go and get it done. If it is going to save her life so that she can be there for her children then so be it. We (the tax payers) are not paying for the treatment then I don't see the problem. She is not the only person that has gone to the U.S. to have treatment and I don't see anyone else being raked over the coals about it. I wish her well and a speedy recovery.
You call this 'poverty'?
You call this 'poverty'?
Each year, when you hear the latest Census Bureau numbers on poverty – when they say how many of our fellow Americans are poor – what do you picture?
If you're like most Americans, you imagine people who are destitute. They lack decent shelter. They don't have enough food and clothing. Luxuries are virtually non-existent. They might even beg on street corners.
Well, I have some good news for you: Although there are desperate people who fit that description – real people who need our help – most of the folks the government classifies as "poor" live a very different lifestyle than you might imagine.
My Heritage Foundation colleague Robert Rector, who is among the foremost experts on poverty in the nation, has examined the Census numbers and found that, thankfully, the "poor" in America are far better off than those who espouse bigger government would have you believe. His detailed analysis is available on heritage.org, but here are a few highlights:
Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage and a porch or patio.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Six percent of poor households are considered overcrowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other European cities. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Now, why should this matter? Because when kind-hearted Americans hear that in 2005, the Census Bureau found 37 million "poor" Americans, they assume there are … well, 37 million Americans scratching out a hand-to-mouth existence that rivals that of Tom Joad's family in "The Grapes of Wrath." And when politicians exploit that perception to further their own ends – to whip up "class warfare" to justify higher taxes or increased spending on failed programs – Americans wind up being played for fools.
Again, there are those who are truly in need. And if you've ever wondered why, in America – one of the most blessed and affluent nations in the world – some people suffer in poverty, Rector explains the cause and the solutions:
Much poverty that does exist in the United States can be reduced, particularly among children. There are two main reasons that American children are poor: Their parents don't work much, and their fathers are absent from the home. … [T]he typical American poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year – the equivalent of 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year – the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year – nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.
By enshrining policies hostile to marriage and work – the two great poverty-slayers – the government actually perpetuates poverty. Programs such as public housing, food stamps and Medicaid "reward idleness and penalize marriage," Rector says. And the problem is made worse, he adds, by the immigration influx:
Each year, the U.S. imports, through both legal and illegal immigration, hundreds of thousands of additional poor persons from abroad. As a result, one-quarter of all poor persons in the U.S. are now first-generation immigrants or the minor children of those immigrants. Roughly one in 10 of the persons counted among the poor by the Census Bureau is either an illegal immigrant or the minor child of an illegal.
So, if we really want to reduce poverty, America's course should be clear: Support timeless values like fidelity, hard work and personal responsibility. We must also reduce illegal immigration and increase the skill level of future legal immigrants. Remember the real answers the next time some politician says it's simply a matter of raising your taxes.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57730
Each year, when you hear the latest Census Bureau numbers on poverty – when they say how many of our fellow Americans are poor – what do you picture?
If you're like most Americans, you imagine people who are destitute. They lack decent shelter. They don't have enough food and clothing. Luxuries are virtually non-existent. They might even beg on street corners.
Well, I have some good news for you: Although there are desperate people who fit that description – real people who need our help – most of the folks the government classifies as "poor" live a very different lifestyle than you might imagine.
My Heritage Foundation colleague Robert Rector, who is among the foremost experts on poverty in the nation, has examined the Census numbers and found that, thankfully, the "poor" in America are far better off than those who espouse bigger government would have you believe. His detailed analysis is available on heritage.org, but here are a few highlights:
Forty-three percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage and a porch or patio.
Eighty percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, in 1970, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.
Six percent of poor households are considered overcrowded; two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.
The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens and other European cities. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)
Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 31 percent own two or more cars.
Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.
Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.
Eighty-nine percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a more than a third have an automatic dishwasher.
Now, why should this matter? Because when kind-hearted Americans hear that in 2005, the Census Bureau found 37 million "poor" Americans, they assume there are … well, 37 million Americans scratching out a hand-to-mouth existence that rivals that of Tom Joad's family in "The Grapes of Wrath." And when politicians exploit that perception to further their own ends – to whip up "class warfare" to justify higher taxes or increased spending on failed programs – Americans wind up being played for fools.
Again, there are those who are truly in need. And if you've ever wondered why, in America – one of the most blessed and affluent nations in the world – some people suffer in poverty, Rector explains the cause and the solutions:
Much poverty that does exist in the United States can be reduced, particularly among children. There are two main reasons that American children are poor: Their parents don't work much, and their fathers are absent from the home. … [T]he typical American poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year – the equivalent of 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year – the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year – nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.
By enshrining policies hostile to marriage and work – the two great poverty-slayers – the government actually perpetuates poverty. Programs such as public housing, food stamps and Medicaid "reward idleness and penalize marriage," Rector says. And the problem is made worse, he adds, by the immigration influx:
Each year, the U.S. imports, through both legal and illegal immigration, hundreds of thousands of additional poor persons from abroad. As a result, one-quarter of all poor persons in the U.S. are now first-generation immigrants or the minor children of those immigrants. Roughly one in 10 of the persons counted among the poor by the Census Bureau is either an illegal immigrant or the minor child of an illegal.
So, if we really want to reduce poverty, America's course should be clear: Support timeless values like fidelity, hard work and personal responsibility. We must also reduce illegal immigration and increase the skill level of future legal immigrants. Remember the real answers the next time some politician says it's simply a matter of raising your taxes.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57730
'Dozens died in Syria-Iran missile test'
'Dozens died in Syria-Iran missile test'
By JPOST.COM STAFF
Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in Jane's Defence Weekly, which reported that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria.
Syrian and Iranian Presidents, Bashar Assad, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, listen to national anthems at the Ash-Shaeb presidential palace in Damascus, Thursday.
Photo: AP RELATED
Analysis: There's a reason world is quiet on alleged IAF strike
J'lem downplays Iranian threat; Olmert: I respect Assad
According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas.
Reports of the accident were circulated at the time; however, no details were released by the Syrian government, and there were no hints of an Iranian connection.
The report comes on the heels of criticism leveled by the Syrians at the United States, accusing it of spreading "false" claims of Syrian nuclear activity and cooperation with North Korea to excuse an alleged Israeli air incursion over the country this month.
According to globalsecurity.org, Syria is not a signatory of either the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), - an international agreement banning the production, stockpiling or use of chemical weapons - or the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
Syria began developing chemical weapons in 1973, just before the Yom Kipper War. Globalsecurity.org cites the country as having one of the most advanced chemical weapons programs in the Middle East.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
By JPOST.COM STAFF
Proof of cooperation between Iran and Syria in the proliferation and development of weapons of mass destruction was brought to light Monday in Jane's Defence Weekly, which reported that dozens of Iranian engineers and 15 Syrian officers were killed in a July 23 accident in Syria.
Syrian and Iranian Presidents, Bashar Assad, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, listen to national anthems at the Ash-Shaeb presidential palace in Damascus, Thursday.
Photo: AP RELATED
Analysis: There's a reason world is quiet on alleged IAF strike
J'lem downplays Iranian threat; Olmert: I respect Assad
According to the report, cited by Channel 10, the joint Syrian-Iranian team was attempting to mount a chemical warhead on a Scud missile when the explosion occurred, spreading lethal chemical agents, including sarin nerve gas.
Reports of the accident were circulated at the time; however, no details were released by the Syrian government, and there were no hints of an Iranian connection.
The report comes on the heels of criticism leveled by the Syrians at the United States, accusing it of spreading "false" claims of Syrian nuclear activity and cooperation with North Korea to excuse an alleged Israeli air incursion over the country this month.
According to globalsecurity.org, Syria is not a signatory of either the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), - an international agreement banning the production, stockpiling or use of chemical weapons - or the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT).
Syria began developing chemical weapons in 1973, just before the Yom Kipper War. Globalsecurity.org cites the country as having one of the most advanced chemical weapons programs in the Middle East.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1189411428847&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
Monday, September 17, 2007
What the Muslim Brotherhood Means for America:
What the Muslim Brotherhood Means for America:
Memo Reveals Plan to Destroy US From Within
"Our strategy is this," President Bush said last month. "We will fight them over there so we do not have to face them in the United States of America."
He was talking about Jihadists, of course. And Mr. Bush is behind the curve. The president apparently missed the smoking-gun 1991 document his own Justice Department introduced into evidence at the Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas. The FBI captured it in a raid on a Muslim suspect's home in Virginia.
This "explanatory memorandum," as it's titled, outlines the "strategic goal" for the North American operation of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan). Here's the key paragraph:
The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack.
The entire 18-page platform outlines a plan for the long haul. It prescribes the Muslim Brotherhood's comprehensive plan to set down roots in civil society. It begins by both founding and taking control of American Muslim organizations, for the sake of unifying and educating the U.S. Muslim community – this to prepare it for the establishment of a global Islamic state governed by Sharia.
It sounds like a conspiracy theory out of a bad Hollywood movie – but it's real. Husain Haqqani, head of Boston University's Center for International Relations and a former Islamic radical, confirms that the Brotherhood "has run most significant Muslim organizations in the U.S." as part of the plan outlined in the strategy paper.
The Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial is exposing for the first time how the international Muslim Brotherhood – whose Palestinian division is Hamas – operates as a self-conscious revolutionary vanguard in the United States. The court documents indicate that many leading Muslim-American organizations – including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim American Society – are an integral part of the Brotherhood's efforts to wage Jihad against America by nonviolent means.
The Muslim Brotherhood is an affiliation of at least 70 Islamist organizations around the world, all tracing their heritage to the original cell, founded in Egypt in 1928. Its credo: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Quran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." Sayyid Qutb, hanged by the Egyptian government in 1966 as a revolutionary, remains its ideological godfather. His best-known work, Milestones, calls for Muslims to wage violent holy war until Islamic law governs the entire world.
According to a 2004 Chicago Tribune investigation, establishing the Brotherhood in the United States has been a 40-year project that has worked mostly underground – even beneath the notice of many Muslims. Richard Clarke, the former top U.S. national security official, told the Senate in 2003 that the Muslim Brotherhood is the common thread linking terrorist fundraising schemes in the United States – which likely explains why so many mainstream American Muslim organizations were named by the feds as "unindicted co-conspirators" in the HLF trial.
Is this just alarmist paranoia? Not at all.
This matters because high-profile organizations with roots explicitly in the Muslim Brotherhood have successfully established themselves in a paramount position to define Islam in America according to a radical politicized model. And they've done so without the American public having the slightest idea about their real agenda. Indeed, the Bush administration is unwittingly helping the Islamist cause by including their leaders in public events, thus conferring them legitimacy. On Labor Day weekend, the same Department of Justice that's presenting evidence of the ISNA's involvement with radical Islam at the Dallas trial sponsored a booth at – wait for it – ISNA's national convention in suburban Chicago.
Look, no rational person believes America is going to exchange the Constitution for a caliphate. Rational people aren't the point. As the London subway bombings showed, even a tiny cell of committed radicals can kill a lot of people. Mustafa Saied, an American Muslim who left the Brotherhood, told the Tribune that he worried about the radicalism the Brotherhood inculcated in its membership here. "With the extreme element," he said, "you never know when that ticking time bomb will go off."
As long as they commit no crimes, CAIR, ISNA and the other Brotherhood-related groups have the right to advocate for their beliefs. But they don't have the right to escape critical scrutiny, and they deserve informed opposition. Courageous Muslims like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy are sounding the alarm about radical Islam's stealth takeover of U.S. Muslim institutions. Why are the news media ignoring this? Fear of being called Islamophobic?
This has got to stop. Six years after 9/11, we're still asleep. Islamic radicals have declared war on us – and some are fighting here in what looks like a fifth column. Read their strategy document. It's there in black and white, for those with eyes to see.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1330248
Memo Reveals Plan to Destroy US From Within
"Our strategy is this," President Bush said last month. "We will fight them over there so we do not have to face them in the United States of America."
He was talking about Jihadists, of course. And Mr. Bush is behind the curve. The president apparently missed the smoking-gun 1991 document his own Justice Department introduced into evidence at the Holy Land Foundation trial in Dallas. The FBI captured it in a raid on a Muslim suspect's home in Virginia.
This "explanatory memorandum," as it's titled, outlines the "strategic goal" for the North American operation of the extremist Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan). Here's the key paragraph:
The process of settlement [of Islam in the United States] is a "Civilization-Jihadist" process with all the word means. The Ikhwan must understand that all their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" their miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who choose to slack.
The entire 18-page platform outlines a plan for the long haul. It prescribes the Muslim Brotherhood's comprehensive plan to set down roots in civil society. It begins by both founding and taking control of American Muslim organizations, for the sake of unifying and educating the U.S. Muslim community – this to prepare it for the establishment of a global Islamic state governed by Sharia.
It sounds like a conspiracy theory out of a bad Hollywood movie – but it's real. Husain Haqqani, head of Boston University's Center for International Relations and a former Islamic radical, confirms that the Brotherhood "has run most significant Muslim organizations in the U.S." as part of the plan outlined in the strategy paper.
The Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial is exposing for the first time how the international Muslim Brotherhood – whose Palestinian division is Hamas – operates as a self-conscious revolutionary vanguard in the United States. The court documents indicate that many leading Muslim-American organizations – including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Muslim American Society – are an integral part of the Brotherhood's efforts to wage Jihad against America by nonviolent means.
The Muslim Brotherhood is an affiliation of at least 70 Islamist organizations around the world, all tracing their heritage to the original cell, founded in Egypt in 1928. Its credo: "Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Quran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." Sayyid Qutb, hanged by the Egyptian government in 1966 as a revolutionary, remains its ideological godfather. His best-known work, Milestones, calls for Muslims to wage violent holy war until Islamic law governs the entire world.
According to a 2004 Chicago Tribune investigation, establishing the Brotherhood in the United States has been a 40-year project that has worked mostly underground – even beneath the notice of many Muslims. Richard Clarke, the former top U.S. national security official, told the Senate in 2003 that the Muslim Brotherhood is the common thread linking terrorist fundraising schemes in the United States – which likely explains why so many mainstream American Muslim organizations were named by the feds as "unindicted co-conspirators" in the HLF trial.
Is this just alarmist paranoia? Not at all.
This matters because high-profile organizations with roots explicitly in the Muslim Brotherhood have successfully established themselves in a paramount position to define Islam in America according to a radical politicized model. And they've done so without the American public having the slightest idea about their real agenda. Indeed, the Bush administration is unwittingly helping the Islamist cause by including their leaders in public events, thus conferring them legitimacy. On Labor Day weekend, the same Department of Justice that's presenting evidence of the ISNA's involvement with radical Islam at the Dallas trial sponsored a booth at – wait for it – ISNA's national convention in suburban Chicago.
Look, no rational person believes America is going to exchange the Constitution for a caliphate. Rational people aren't the point. As the London subway bombings showed, even a tiny cell of committed radicals can kill a lot of people. Mustafa Saied, an American Muslim who left the Brotherhood, told the Tribune that he worried about the radicalism the Brotherhood inculcated in its membership here. "With the extreme element," he said, "you never know when that ticking time bomb will go off."
As long as they commit no crimes, CAIR, ISNA and the other Brotherhood-related groups have the right to advocate for their beliefs. But they don't have the right to escape critical scrutiny, and they deserve informed opposition. Courageous Muslims like Dr. Zuhdi Jasser of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy are sounding the alarm about radical Islam's stealth takeover of U.S. Muslim institutions. Why are the news media ignoring this? Fear of being called Islamophobic?
This has got to stop. Six years after 9/11, we're still asleep. Islamic radicals have declared war on us – and some are fighting here in what looks like a fifth column. Read their strategy document. It's there in black and white, for those with eyes to see.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/terrorism.php?id=1330248
Democrats' so-called 'support' of troops
Democrats' so-called 'support' of troops
Craig Smith
Posted: September 17, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Gen. David Petraeus
In another stellar showing of their "support for the troops," Democrats last week did more to destroy unit cohesiveness than any other single issue in U.S. military history. If this week doesn't settle once and for all the outright disdain Democrats have for the military, nothing will.
Gen. Petraeus by all accounts is a man who has dedicated his life to service to his nation. His commitment to honor is without question. Yet in two short sessions before the United States Congress (united... what a joke) Democrat interrogators attempted to reduce this fine man to nothing more than a partisan hack of the Bush administration. In their words, the general lies and cannot be trusted.
Mind you, this is the man the Congress unanimously confirmed to lead the "surge" in Iraq – the leader of the troops Democrats claim to support. They support the troops but not the mission, and now they want you to believe they support the troops but not their leader. Funny way these Dems have of showing support.
After a week of Moveon.org, Chris Matthews, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, etc. attacking him, Gen. Petraeus is tasked to return to his command in Iraq and lead the forces who have just been told their leader cannot be trusted. Is this a brilliant Democratic idea or just more evidence of the outright hatred the Dems have for the military? Democrats expect the troops to trust this man and his orders when they repeated over and over this week they don't? Even Al Franken can't make that work.
There was a glaringly important element missing from the Democratic response to Gen. Petraeus' report and President Bush's address. Not one Democrat leader or liberal commentator acknowledged any military progress. Startling given Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution reported progress in security and a marked improvement in the morale amongst the troops on his visit to Iraq. Katie Couric reported improvements on her recent trip. John McCain corrected Mitt Romney that the surge is working. Troop re-enlistment rates indicate it is. Gen. Petraeus says there is improvement. Even five-term democratic Rep. Brian Baird, who voted against the Iraq invasion, has stated that we are making progress. Yet, despite multiple reports of progress on the ground, not one acknowledgement from Democratic leadership.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., claims "by all objective measures, the surge has failed." Sounds like Harry telling us we lost the war completely back a few months ago. What is it with these Democrats? Are they really that against any progress? Do they want defeat at any cost?
If the Moveon.org ad portraying Gen. Petraeus as Judas and Code Pink's lack of respect for decorum with violent outbursts during the hearings doesn't prove that the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the most extreme elements on the left, nothing will. Few, if any, Democrats denounced Moveon.org or gave back money they received from kissing George Soros' ring. Hillary, John and Barak have all taken money and continue to do so from Moveon.org. We are judged by the company we keep.
I guess what really startled me the most about this week was the new sixth sense the Democrats have developed for identifying the truth. They didn't even hear Gen. Petraeus speak to know he was lying. Moveon.org placed the ad days before his testimony. Hillary and company were giving comments before listening to one word. Tom Lantos said "I don't buy it," 15 minutes before the Gen. uttered a syllable. I found it rather appropriate that Gen. Petraeus' microphone was not working. The hearing had to recess for repairs. Why? Democrats were not going to listen anyway. They had already made up their minds. He is a liar. There was no need for a microphone.
The general took great care to establish in his first few words that he wrote his report himself and did not clear it with the Pentagon or the White House. But the ESP-equipped Dems knew better. Why with this new-found talent there should be no need for a justice system. If you are accused of a crime, just have a Democrat listen and look at the evidence, and they will be able to tell you who is guilty and who is innocent without any testimony. Heck they don't even need to look or listen. They apparently can just divine the truth. Think of all the money and time they will save us. More cash to spend on the failed social programs they so enjoy. No need for judges, courtrooms and yes… lawyers. Hallelujah!
Democrats have done a great job making the public distrustful of anything they have not ordained to be the truth. Israel struck Syria last week claiming concerns about possible nuclear activity and documented shipments of arms from Iran to Hezbollah. Syria claims it is not true, and Israel is doing to them what the U.S. did to Iraq. Now Syria, a known sponsor of terrorism, is believed by the press, and Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East, is painted as a liar. Do those who undermine everything done to fight extremism realize the damage they do?
Let the Democrats continue to undermine all U.S. military efforts, and it is only a matter of time before there will be no need for a military. In fact, if they hold Congress and win the White House in 2008, they can disband the military. Think of the money they will save there as well. It is clear to me they see no need for a military or they wouldn't translate labeling military leaders and the commander in chief liars into support for the troops. What soldier is going to follow the orders of a liar?
In 2008, I can see it now. If Hillary is in the White House and Nancy Pelosi is speaker of a democratically-controlled Congress, the first bill they will propose is one that would require the flag to go through a complete redesign. They can drop two colors from the flag: red and blue. Once again saving money and creating a flag all Democrats, members of Moveon.org and Code Pink will be proud of. Hillary will proudly sign it as her first official presidential act. Surrender!
Craig Smith
Posted: September 17, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Gen. David Petraeus
In another stellar showing of their "support for the troops," Democrats last week did more to destroy unit cohesiveness than any other single issue in U.S. military history. If this week doesn't settle once and for all the outright disdain Democrats have for the military, nothing will.
Gen. Petraeus by all accounts is a man who has dedicated his life to service to his nation. His commitment to honor is without question. Yet in two short sessions before the United States Congress (united... what a joke) Democrat interrogators attempted to reduce this fine man to nothing more than a partisan hack of the Bush administration. In their words, the general lies and cannot be trusted.
Mind you, this is the man the Congress unanimously confirmed to lead the "surge" in Iraq – the leader of the troops Democrats claim to support. They support the troops but not the mission, and now they want you to believe they support the troops but not their leader. Funny way these Dems have of showing support.
After a week of Moveon.org, Chris Matthews, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, etc. attacking him, Gen. Petraeus is tasked to return to his command in Iraq and lead the forces who have just been told their leader cannot be trusted. Is this a brilliant Democratic idea or just more evidence of the outright hatred the Dems have for the military? Democrats expect the troops to trust this man and his orders when they repeated over and over this week they don't? Even Al Franken can't make that work.
There was a glaringly important element missing from the Democratic response to Gen. Petraeus' report and President Bush's address. Not one Democrat leader or liberal commentator acknowledged any military progress. Startling given Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution reported progress in security and a marked improvement in the morale amongst the troops on his visit to Iraq. Katie Couric reported improvements on her recent trip. John McCain corrected Mitt Romney that the surge is working. Troop re-enlistment rates indicate it is. Gen. Petraeus says there is improvement. Even five-term democratic Rep. Brian Baird, who voted against the Iraq invasion, has stated that we are making progress. Yet, despite multiple reports of progress on the ground, not one acknowledgement from Democratic leadership.
Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., claims "by all objective measures, the surge has failed." Sounds like Harry telling us we lost the war completely back a few months ago. What is it with these Democrats? Are they really that against any progress? Do they want defeat at any cost?
If the Moveon.org ad portraying Gen. Petraeus as Judas and Code Pink's lack of respect for decorum with violent outbursts during the hearings doesn't prove that the Democratic Party has been hijacked by the most extreme elements on the left, nothing will. Few, if any, Democrats denounced Moveon.org or gave back money they received from kissing George Soros' ring. Hillary, John and Barak have all taken money and continue to do so from Moveon.org. We are judged by the company we keep.
I guess what really startled me the most about this week was the new sixth sense the Democrats have developed for identifying the truth. They didn't even hear Gen. Petraeus speak to know he was lying. Moveon.org placed the ad days before his testimony. Hillary and company were giving comments before listening to one word. Tom Lantos said "I don't buy it," 15 minutes before the Gen. uttered a syllable. I found it rather appropriate that Gen. Petraeus' microphone was not working. The hearing had to recess for repairs. Why? Democrats were not going to listen anyway. They had already made up their minds. He is a liar. There was no need for a microphone.
The general took great care to establish in his first few words that he wrote his report himself and did not clear it with the Pentagon or the White House. But the ESP-equipped Dems knew better. Why with this new-found talent there should be no need for a justice system. If you are accused of a crime, just have a Democrat listen and look at the evidence, and they will be able to tell you who is guilty and who is innocent without any testimony. Heck they don't even need to look or listen. They apparently can just divine the truth. Think of all the money and time they will save us. More cash to spend on the failed social programs they so enjoy. No need for judges, courtrooms and yes… lawyers. Hallelujah!
Democrats have done a great job making the public distrustful of anything they have not ordained to be the truth. Israel struck Syria last week claiming concerns about possible nuclear activity and documented shipments of arms from Iran to Hezbollah. Syria claims it is not true, and Israel is doing to them what the U.S. did to Iraq. Now Syria, a known sponsor of terrorism, is believed by the press, and Israel, the only true democracy in the Middle East, is painted as a liar. Do those who undermine everything done to fight extremism realize the damage they do?
Let the Democrats continue to undermine all U.S. military efforts, and it is only a matter of time before there will be no need for a military. In fact, if they hold Congress and win the White House in 2008, they can disband the military. Think of the money they will save there as well. It is clear to me they see no need for a military or they wouldn't translate labeling military leaders and the commander in chief liars into support for the troops. What soldier is going to follow the orders of a liar?
In 2008, I can see it now. If Hillary is in the White House and Nancy Pelosi is speaker of a democratically-controlled Congress, the first bill they will propose is one that would require the flag to go through a complete redesign. They can drop two colors from the flag: red and blue. Once again saving money and creating a flag all Democrats, members of Moveon.org and Code Pink will be proud of. Hillary will proudly sign it as her first official presidential act. Surrender!
Amnesty for illegals back for another try
Amnesty for illegals back for another try
Amendments to defense funding bill subject of debate in Senate this week
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 16, 2007
4:40 p.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
President Bush's comprehensive immigration reform, defeated in June, will make a second appearance this week when the Senate takes up various pro-amnesty amendments submitted to the Department of Defense funding bill, H.R. 1585, which is scheduled for debate.
While not "comprehensive" reform, the latest initiative attempts to pass key provisions of the earlier immigration measure piece by piece by attaching amendments to unrelated bills, a process critics characterize as "stealth."
Sen. Dick Durbin
Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill., has re-introduced another version of his "Dream Act," this time as an amendment (SA 2237) to the DOD funding bill.
The Dream Act would grant citizenship status to certain illegal aliens under 16 years of age who are pursuing college degrees and would allow them to receive in-state college tuition rates on an equal basis with U.S. citizens.
Steve Elliot, president of Grassfire.org, told WND his group plans to launch next week a nationwide awareness campaign to voice opposition to the Durbin amendment.
According to Numbers USA, the Dream Act amendment allows an illegal alien to remain in the U.S. on a track headed for citizenship, provided:
1. the illegal alien can demonstrate continuous presence in the U.S. for five years and was not yet 16 years old upon initial entry;
2. the illegal alien is of "good moral character" and is not inadmissible on criminal grounds or because the illegal alien is a national security risk; an
3. the illegal alien has been admitted to an institution of higher education, has attained a high school diploma, or has obtained a GED in the U.S.
Critics charge the Dream Act is a free pass to millions of illegal aliens, especially given the rampant documentation and identity theft fraud accompanying illegal immigration for decades.
One set of amendments that won't be debated are three filed last spring by Sen. John Cornyn, R.-Texas. SA 2140, SA 2141, and 2142 would greatly expand H-1B visas, granting U.S. corporations an increased number of immigrants, largely from India, to compete on a low-cost basis with U.S. college-trained graduates with comparable technical skills.
Cornyn co-chairs the U.S.-India Caucus in the Senate along with Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
Sen. Cornyn's office assured WND yesterday the senator has no current intention of offering these amendments at this time to the DOD funding bill being debated this week.
"It's getting late and it's time to pass the Department of Defense funding bill," a spokesman for Cornyn's office told WND, "but we don't see the advantage of tacking on a lot of extraneous measures to the bill that have nothing to do with national defense."
Cornyn's H-1B amendments would have increased by several hundred thousand the number of technically-trained immigrants allowed to work in the U.S., despite evidence many H-1B visa workers remain in the U.S. after their visas have expired.
An article written by globalization-advocates Kenneth Scheve, a political science professor at Yale, and Matthew Slaughter, an economics professor at Dartmouth, in the July/August issue of the Council on Foreign Relations magazine, Foreign Affairs, worries that recently released data will cause a backlash against "free trade" measures, given the adverse impact on U.S. earnings since George W. Bush took office as president.
Scheve and Slaughter cite U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics studies demonstrating 96.6 percent of all U.S. workers – including college educated and technically trained-workers – have lost real wages since 2000.
The only wage earners who have gained real wages since 2000 are a "thriving elite" of CEOs who head multi-national corporations and the MBAs, Ph.D.s, and lawyers who advise these multi-nationals, according the Bureau data.
WND reported last week Cornyn's offer of a side-by-side amendment to defeat an amendment by Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., to remove funding from the Fiscal Year 2008 Department of Transportation appropriations bill for the department's trucking demonstration project to allow Mexican trucks on U.S. highways.
During the debate, Cornyn offered a mistaken argument from the Senate floor that the U.S. had a "treaty obligation" under the North American Free Trade Act to allow Mexican trucks into the U.S.
The Senate never passed NAFTA as a treaty. Lacking the two-thirds vote needed for passage of a treaty in the Senate, President Clinton submitted NAFTA to Congress as a law.
WND reported the Dorgan amendment passed by a bipartisan vote of 75-23. The vote originally was 74-24, but Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., later changed her tally.
Amendments to defense funding bill subject of debate in Senate this week
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: September 16, 2007
4:40 p.m. Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2007 WorldNetDaily.com
President Bush's comprehensive immigration reform, defeated in June, will make a second appearance this week when the Senate takes up various pro-amnesty amendments submitted to the Department of Defense funding bill, H.R. 1585, which is scheduled for debate.
While not "comprehensive" reform, the latest initiative attempts to pass key provisions of the earlier immigration measure piece by piece by attaching amendments to unrelated bills, a process critics characterize as "stealth."
Sen. Dick Durbin
Assistant Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill., has re-introduced another version of his "Dream Act," this time as an amendment (SA 2237) to the DOD funding bill.
The Dream Act would grant citizenship status to certain illegal aliens under 16 years of age who are pursuing college degrees and would allow them to receive in-state college tuition rates on an equal basis with U.S. citizens.
Steve Elliot, president of Grassfire.org, told WND his group plans to launch next week a nationwide awareness campaign to voice opposition to the Durbin amendment.
According to Numbers USA, the Dream Act amendment allows an illegal alien to remain in the U.S. on a track headed for citizenship, provided:
1. the illegal alien can demonstrate continuous presence in the U.S. for five years and was not yet 16 years old upon initial entry;
2. the illegal alien is of "good moral character" and is not inadmissible on criminal grounds or because the illegal alien is a national security risk; an
3. the illegal alien has been admitted to an institution of higher education, has attained a high school diploma, or has obtained a GED in the U.S.
Critics charge the Dream Act is a free pass to millions of illegal aliens, especially given the rampant documentation and identity theft fraud accompanying illegal immigration for decades.
One set of amendments that won't be debated are three filed last spring by Sen. John Cornyn, R.-Texas. SA 2140, SA 2141, and 2142 would greatly expand H-1B visas, granting U.S. corporations an increased number of immigrants, largely from India, to compete on a low-cost basis with U.S. college-trained graduates with comparable technical skills.
Cornyn co-chairs the U.S.-India Caucus in the Senate along with Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
Sen. Cornyn's office assured WND yesterday the senator has no current intention of offering these amendments at this time to the DOD funding bill being debated this week.
"It's getting late and it's time to pass the Department of Defense funding bill," a spokesman for Cornyn's office told WND, "but we don't see the advantage of tacking on a lot of extraneous measures to the bill that have nothing to do with national defense."
Cornyn's H-1B amendments would have increased by several hundred thousand the number of technically-trained immigrants allowed to work in the U.S., despite evidence many H-1B visa workers remain in the U.S. after their visas have expired.
An article written by globalization-advocates Kenneth Scheve, a political science professor at Yale, and Matthew Slaughter, an economics professor at Dartmouth, in the July/August issue of the Council on Foreign Relations magazine, Foreign Affairs, worries that recently released data will cause a backlash against "free trade" measures, given the adverse impact on U.S. earnings since George W. Bush took office as president.
Scheve and Slaughter cite U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics studies demonstrating 96.6 percent of all U.S. workers – including college educated and technically trained-workers – have lost real wages since 2000.
The only wage earners who have gained real wages since 2000 are a "thriving elite" of CEOs who head multi-national corporations and the MBAs, Ph.D.s, and lawyers who advise these multi-nationals, according the Bureau data.
WND reported last week Cornyn's offer of a side-by-side amendment to defeat an amendment by Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., to remove funding from the Fiscal Year 2008 Department of Transportation appropriations bill for the department's trucking demonstration project to allow Mexican trucks on U.S. highways.
During the debate, Cornyn offered a mistaken argument from the Senate floor that the U.S. had a "treaty obligation" under the North American Free Trade Act to allow Mexican trucks into the U.S.
The Senate never passed NAFTA as a treaty. Lacking the two-thirds vote needed for passage of a treaty in the Senate, President Clinton submitted NAFTA to Congress as a law.
WND reported the Dorgan amendment passed by a bipartisan vote of 75-23. The vote originally was 74-24, but Sen. Elizabeth Dole, R-N.C., later changed her tally.
Clinton unveils civil rights agenda at NAACP event
Clinton unveils civil rights agenda at NAACP event
September 16, 2007
BY BRUCE SMITH
NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, unveiling her agenda to promote civil rights, told an NAACP banquet Saturday that the "scales of justice are seriously out of balance" for black Americans.
"We have had an attorney general who doesn't respect the rule of law or enforce the civil rights laws on the books," she told about 900 people at the annual Freedom Fund Banquet of the Charleston NAACP.
Clinton said too many people are invisible to the nation's leaders.
"You're invisible to the president even when you are on CNN," she said, referring to the survivors of Hurricane Katrina two years ago.
Clinton said her administration would seek to rebuild the Justice Department's traditional role in defending civil rights and to review charges of improper, politically motivated hiring to determine if any laws were broken.
"We have to believe justice is blind in America," she said.
Friday in Los Angeles, Clinton pursued votes with basketball legend Earvin "Magic" Johnson. Last weekend, rival Barack Obama banked $3 million at a fund-raiser at Oprah Winfrey's seaside estate.
Johnson held a fund-raiser for Clinton at his Beverly Hills home Friday night. It was considerably smaller than the lavish event staged by Winfrey. AP
________________________________
My Comments:
This woman is dellusional! Like she really CARES!!! whatever... anyone who belives this spew is a moron!
September 16, 2007
BY BRUCE SMITH
NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, unveiling her agenda to promote civil rights, told an NAACP banquet Saturday that the "scales of justice are seriously out of balance" for black Americans.
"We have had an attorney general who doesn't respect the rule of law or enforce the civil rights laws on the books," she told about 900 people at the annual Freedom Fund Banquet of the Charleston NAACP.
Clinton said too many people are invisible to the nation's leaders.
"You're invisible to the president even when you are on CNN," she said, referring to the survivors of Hurricane Katrina two years ago.
Clinton said her administration would seek to rebuild the Justice Department's traditional role in defending civil rights and to review charges of improper, politically motivated hiring to determine if any laws were broken.
"We have to believe justice is blind in America," she said.
Friday in Los Angeles, Clinton pursued votes with basketball legend Earvin "Magic" Johnson. Last weekend, rival Barack Obama banked $3 million at a fund-raiser at Oprah Winfrey's seaside estate.
Johnson held a fund-raiser for Clinton at his Beverly Hills home Friday night. It was considerably smaller than the lavish event staged by Winfrey. AP
________________________________
My Comments:
This woman is dellusional! Like she really CARES!!! whatever... anyone who belives this spew is a moron!
Hellary's chilling honesty
Hellary's chilling honesty
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57670
Posted: September 17, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
Hillary Clinton and her husband, Bill Rodham, are being completely honest in this presidential campaign of theirs. I know, I know, it's startling, but the Dynamic Duo of Deceit and Deception is, for once, being very up front on two major campaign themes without parsing words with an atom splitter.
Those two themes are "we'll be safer" and "you will no longer be invisible to your government."
This might sound hunky-dory to some voters, but the methods they'll use to attain both are what deserve scrutiny.
As you know, another fundraising scandal has been swirling around Hillary – a revelation as shocking as waking up to find the sun rising in the East and Larry Craig insisting he's not gay.
Allegedly, after "discovering" the felonious history of Norman Hsu, the Hillary Clinton campaign vowed to require all major fundraisers to submit to a criminal background check.
Anybody who passes the background check will of course be kicked off her campaign.
Seriously though, if Hillary's going to be checking fundraisers for criminal records, the only way to add complete integrity to the process is to make sure it also works the other way around, but don't hold your breath.
Though this is considered a "scandal," dirty money is where the "security" part of Hillary's platform comes in.
The Clintons insist that we were safer when Bill Clinton was president. Now that Hillary's running, they're asking Americans if they want to go back to those peaceful times when there were only five destructive missiles launched in eight years – two at Afghanistan, two at Sudan and the one documented in the Starr Report.
I don't doubt for one second that this country was at least a little safer when Bill Clinton was president, especially concerning China. The Chinese weren't about to nuke the White House with their own citizens crashing in the Lincoln bedroom, especially if they had the state checkbook with them.
Norman Hsu was born and raised in Hong Kong. This doesn't involve China directly, and Hsu is an American citizen, but don't forget – this was only a preseason game.
I have no doubt the Clintons are serious when speaking of national security – it's how they go about it that has always been the problem.
Here's the Clintons' philosophy on national security: Your enemies usually won't want to harm you as long as there are still cheap goodies available in your national garage sale.
This is, to a great degree, "security by mutual extortion" – an under-the-table quasi free market system that provides open communists abroad and closet Marxists at home a way to practice guilt-free capitalism because their principles aren't being publicly compromised.
Invisibility vs. transparency
The second item in recent weeks that Hillary's been focusing on is evident in her campaign ads.
Ads that ran in Iowa and elsewhere featured Hillary touting what will happen if she's elected: Americans "will no longer be invisible to their government." Well I don't doubt it – she's got our FBI files and a heck of a bright flashlight.
If only Hillary would allow her documents as First Lady to be as visible and accessible as she wants the rest of us to be.
"You will no longer be invisible to your government" is targeted as an attractive line to anybody seeking a handout, freebie and ready access to somebody else's money – a demographic the Democrats have sewed up nicely – but for the rest of us, this talk should give us goosebumps.
What does this "you won't be invisible to my administration" rhetoric really say? "We will know where you are, what you're doing, what you're eating, what you're drinking, what you're buying, who your doctor is, what you're smoking, where you're sending your kids to school and what kind of car you're driving."
I want a president who appreciates my desire to remain invisible to my government, and Hillary won't be that person. The government should be transparent by force and the citizens invisible by choice – unfortunately it's become the other way around.
What would be humorous if it weren't so sad is that those who nod their collective heads in agreement when they hear "you will no longer be invisible to your government" are many of the same people who despise the Bush administration for warrantless wiretaps on suspected terrorists.
Hasn't anybody considered that maybe Dubya is just trying to find out where they live so he can offer them free health care?
----------------------------------------------------------
My Comments:
I AGREE 100%
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57670
Posted: September 17, 2007
1:00 a.m. Eastern
Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y.
Hillary Clinton and her husband, Bill Rodham, are being completely honest in this presidential campaign of theirs. I know, I know, it's startling, but the Dynamic Duo of Deceit and Deception is, for once, being very up front on two major campaign themes without parsing words with an atom splitter.
Those two themes are "we'll be safer" and "you will no longer be invisible to your government."
This might sound hunky-dory to some voters, but the methods they'll use to attain both are what deserve scrutiny.
As you know, another fundraising scandal has been swirling around Hillary – a revelation as shocking as waking up to find the sun rising in the East and Larry Craig insisting he's not gay.
Allegedly, after "discovering" the felonious history of Norman Hsu, the Hillary Clinton campaign vowed to require all major fundraisers to submit to a criminal background check.
Anybody who passes the background check will of course be kicked off her campaign.
Seriously though, if Hillary's going to be checking fundraisers for criminal records, the only way to add complete integrity to the process is to make sure it also works the other way around, but don't hold your breath.
Though this is considered a "scandal," dirty money is where the "security" part of Hillary's platform comes in.
The Clintons insist that we were safer when Bill Clinton was president. Now that Hillary's running, they're asking Americans if they want to go back to those peaceful times when there were only five destructive missiles launched in eight years – two at Afghanistan, two at Sudan and the one documented in the Starr Report.
I don't doubt for one second that this country was at least a little safer when Bill Clinton was president, especially concerning China. The Chinese weren't about to nuke the White House with their own citizens crashing in the Lincoln bedroom, especially if they had the state checkbook with them.
Norman Hsu was born and raised in Hong Kong. This doesn't involve China directly, and Hsu is an American citizen, but don't forget – this was only a preseason game.
I have no doubt the Clintons are serious when speaking of national security – it's how they go about it that has always been the problem.
Here's the Clintons' philosophy on national security: Your enemies usually won't want to harm you as long as there are still cheap goodies available in your national garage sale.
This is, to a great degree, "security by mutual extortion" – an under-the-table quasi free market system that provides open communists abroad and closet Marxists at home a way to practice guilt-free capitalism because their principles aren't being publicly compromised.
Invisibility vs. transparency
The second item in recent weeks that Hillary's been focusing on is evident in her campaign ads.
Ads that ran in Iowa and elsewhere featured Hillary touting what will happen if she's elected: Americans "will no longer be invisible to their government." Well I don't doubt it – she's got our FBI files and a heck of a bright flashlight.
If only Hillary would allow her documents as First Lady to be as visible and accessible as she wants the rest of us to be.
"You will no longer be invisible to your government" is targeted as an attractive line to anybody seeking a handout, freebie and ready access to somebody else's money – a demographic the Democrats have sewed up nicely – but for the rest of us, this talk should give us goosebumps.
What does this "you won't be invisible to my administration" rhetoric really say? "We will know where you are, what you're doing, what you're eating, what you're drinking, what you're buying, who your doctor is, what you're smoking, where you're sending your kids to school and what kind of car you're driving."
I want a president who appreciates my desire to remain invisible to my government, and Hillary won't be that person. The government should be transparent by force and the citizens invisible by choice – unfortunately it's become the other way around.
What would be humorous if it weren't so sad is that those who nod their collective heads in agreement when they hear "you will no longer be invisible to your government" are many of the same people who despise the Bush administration for warrantless wiretaps on suspected terrorists.
Hasn't anybody considered that maybe Dubya is just trying to find out where they live so he can offer them free health care?
----------------------------------------------------------
My Comments:
I AGREE 100%
Clinton unveils health care plan
Clinton unveils health care plan
Clinton unveils health care plan By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer
27 minutes ago
DES MOINES, Iowa - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton issued a call for universal health care on Monday, plunging back into a political battle she memorably waged and lost as first lady more than a decade ago.
"This is not government-run," Clinton said of her plan to extend coverage to an estimated 47 million Americans who now go without.
She called for a requirement for businesses to obtain insurance for employees, and said the wealthy should pay higher taxes to help defray the cost for those less able to pay for it. She put the government's cost at $110 billion a year.
"Perhaps more than anybody else I know just how hard this fight will be," said the New York senator.
Dismissing the inevitable Republican criticism, Clinton admonished the crowd. "I know my Republican opponents will try to equate health care for all Americans with government-run health care. Don't let them fool us again. This is not government-run."
A front-running contender for her party's nomination, Clinton drew criticism this time from fellow Democrats as well as Republicans.
"To ensure all Americans have affordable health care will take more than leadership that simply knows how to fight," said rival Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
Addressing a crowd at a medical center in the early voting state of Iowa, Clinton laid out her proposal, with the centerpiece a so-called "individual mandate," requiring everyone to have health insurance — just as most states require drivers to purchase auto insurance. Rival John Edwards has also offered a plan that includes an individual mandate, while the proposal outlined by Barack Obama does not.
Clinton's plan builds on the existing employer-based system of coverage. People who receive insurance through the workplace could continue to do so; businesses, in turn, would be required to offer insurance to employees, or contribute to a government-run pool that would help pay for those not covered. Clinton would also offer a tax subsidy to small businesses to help them afford the cost of providing coverage to their workers.
"I believe everyone — every man, woman and child — should have quality, affordable health care in America," said Clinton, vowing to accomplish the goal in her first term.
For individuals and families who are not covered by employers or whose employer-based coverage is inadequate, Clinton would offer expanded versions of two existing government programs: Medicare, and the health insurance plan currently offered to federal employees.
Consumers could choose between either government-run program, but aides stress that no new federal bureaucracy would be created under the Clinton plan.
Clinton proposed several specific measures to pay for her plan, including an end to some of the Bush-era tax cuts for people making more than $250,000 per year. Edwards has vowed to completely repeal the tax cuts for high earners to pay for the cost of his plan, estimated at $90 billion-$120 billion per year, while Obama would pay for his plan in part by letting the tax cuts expire in 2010.
Clinton says she has learned from the 1990s experience, which almost derailed Bill Clinton's presidency and helped put Republicans in control of Congress for years to come. Aides say she has jettisoned the complexity and uncertainty of the last effort in favor of a plan that stresses simplicity, cost control and consumer choice.
In response, Obama said Clinton's plan is similar to one he proposed in the spring, "though my universal health care plan would go further in reducing the punishing cost of health care than any other proposal that's been offered in this campaign."
He took another swipe at the Clinton administration's closed-door sessions on health care in the 1990s, saying "the real key to passing any health care reform is the ability to bring people together in an open, transparent process that builds a broad consensus for change."
Other Democratic rivals were swift in their criticism.
Delaware Sen. Joe Biden said, "If universal health care plans could have gotten us health care, we would have gotten it a long time ago." Added John Edwards: "If you're going to negotiate universal health care with the same powerful interests that defeated it before, your proposal isn't a plan, it's a starting point."
Edwards said on his first day in office he will submit legislation that would pull health insurance for the president, members of Congress and all political appointees unless they pass universal health care within six months.
Republican Mitt Romney, in New York City for a fundraising stop, criticized Clinton's proposal, saying, "'Hillary care' continues to be bad medicine ... in her plan, we have Washington-managed health care. Fundamentally, she takes her inspiration from European bureaucracies."
The plan that Romney helped institute while governor of Massachusetts requires the same individual insurance mandate as Clinton's and uses state subsidies to help reduce the cost of private coverage. Since then, Romney has said he would leave it up to the states to decide whether they supported such a mandate.
Said Republican Rudy Giuliani's campaign: "Senator Clinton's latest health scheme includes more government mandates, expensive federal subsidies and more big bureaucracy — in short, prescription for an increase in wait times, a decrease in patient care and tax hikes to pay for it all."
___
Associated Press Writer Ashley M. Heher in Chicago contributed to this report.
_______________________________________________________
Ha! Not government run my ass!!!! LMAO! So anyway, we already know this is another socialist program by what a shocker a CLINTON. So anyway, just thought I should point out how Canadians want to re-privatize their healthcare since Universal Healthcare isn't working!!!!!!! Did you also know that Canada sends premies to the good old USA for our excellent neo-natal healthcare. They don't have the correct equipment or training to deal with premies so they are flown down here? WOW!!! Well, I for one am not going to pay one cent for someone else's healthcare I pay enough for my own. This is just another entitlment program.
Clinton unveils health care plan By BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writer
27 minutes ago
DES MOINES, Iowa - Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton issued a call for universal health care on Monday, plunging back into a political battle she memorably waged and lost as first lady more than a decade ago.
"This is not government-run," Clinton said of her plan to extend coverage to an estimated 47 million Americans who now go without.
She called for a requirement for businesses to obtain insurance for employees, and said the wealthy should pay higher taxes to help defray the cost for those less able to pay for it. She put the government's cost at $110 billion a year.
"Perhaps more than anybody else I know just how hard this fight will be," said the New York senator.
Dismissing the inevitable Republican criticism, Clinton admonished the crowd. "I know my Republican opponents will try to equate health care for all Americans with government-run health care. Don't let them fool us again. This is not government-run."
A front-running contender for her party's nomination, Clinton drew criticism this time from fellow Democrats as well as Republicans.
"To ensure all Americans have affordable health care will take more than leadership that simply knows how to fight," said rival Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn.
Addressing a crowd at a medical center in the early voting state of Iowa, Clinton laid out her proposal, with the centerpiece a so-called "individual mandate," requiring everyone to have health insurance — just as most states require drivers to purchase auto insurance. Rival John Edwards has also offered a plan that includes an individual mandate, while the proposal outlined by Barack Obama does not.
Clinton's plan builds on the existing employer-based system of coverage. People who receive insurance through the workplace could continue to do so; businesses, in turn, would be required to offer insurance to employees, or contribute to a government-run pool that would help pay for those not covered. Clinton would also offer a tax subsidy to small businesses to help them afford the cost of providing coverage to their workers.
"I believe everyone — every man, woman and child — should have quality, affordable health care in America," said Clinton, vowing to accomplish the goal in her first term.
For individuals and families who are not covered by employers or whose employer-based coverage is inadequate, Clinton would offer expanded versions of two existing government programs: Medicare, and the health insurance plan currently offered to federal employees.
Consumers could choose between either government-run program, but aides stress that no new federal bureaucracy would be created under the Clinton plan.
Clinton proposed several specific measures to pay for her plan, including an end to some of the Bush-era tax cuts for people making more than $250,000 per year. Edwards has vowed to completely repeal the tax cuts for high earners to pay for the cost of his plan, estimated at $90 billion-$120 billion per year, while Obama would pay for his plan in part by letting the tax cuts expire in 2010.
Clinton says she has learned from the 1990s experience, which almost derailed Bill Clinton's presidency and helped put Republicans in control of Congress for years to come. Aides say she has jettisoned the complexity and uncertainty of the last effort in favor of a plan that stresses simplicity, cost control and consumer choice.
In response, Obama said Clinton's plan is similar to one he proposed in the spring, "though my universal health care plan would go further in reducing the punishing cost of health care than any other proposal that's been offered in this campaign."
He took another swipe at the Clinton administration's closed-door sessions on health care in the 1990s, saying "the real key to passing any health care reform is the ability to bring people together in an open, transparent process that builds a broad consensus for change."
Other Democratic rivals were swift in their criticism.
Delaware Sen. Joe Biden said, "If universal health care plans could have gotten us health care, we would have gotten it a long time ago." Added John Edwards: "If you're going to negotiate universal health care with the same powerful interests that defeated it before, your proposal isn't a plan, it's a starting point."
Edwards said on his first day in office he will submit legislation that would pull health insurance for the president, members of Congress and all political appointees unless they pass universal health care within six months.
Republican Mitt Romney, in New York City for a fundraising stop, criticized Clinton's proposal, saying, "'Hillary care' continues to be bad medicine ... in her plan, we have Washington-managed health care. Fundamentally, she takes her inspiration from European bureaucracies."
The plan that Romney helped institute while governor of Massachusetts requires the same individual insurance mandate as Clinton's and uses state subsidies to help reduce the cost of private coverage. Since then, Romney has said he would leave it up to the states to decide whether they supported such a mandate.
Said Republican Rudy Giuliani's campaign: "Senator Clinton's latest health scheme includes more government mandates, expensive federal subsidies and more big bureaucracy — in short, prescription for an increase in wait times, a decrease in patient care and tax hikes to pay for it all."
___
Associated Press Writer Ashley M. Heher in Chicago contributed to this report.
_______________________________________________________
Ha! Not government run my ass!!!! LMAO! So anyway, we already know this is another socialist program by what a shocker a CLINTON. So anyway, just thought I should point out how Canadians want to re-privatize their healthcare since Universal Healthcare isn't working!!!!!!! Did you also know that Canada sends premies to the good old USA for our excellent neo-natal healthcare. They don't have the correct equipment or training to deal with premies so they are flown down here? WOW!!! Well, I for one am not going to pay one cent for someone else's healthcare I pay enough for my own. This is just another entitlment program.