With economy in shambles, Congress gets a raise

By Jordy Yager

A crumbling economy, more than 2 million constituents who have lost their jobs this year, and congressional demands of CEOs to work for free did not convince lawmakers to freeze their own pay. Instead, they will get a $4,700 pay increase, amounting to an additional $2.5 million that taxpayers will spend on congressional salaries, and watchdog groups are not happy about it. “As lawmakers make a big show of forcing auto executives to accept just $1 a year in salary, they are quietly raiding the vault for their own personal gain,” said Daniel O’Connell, chairman of The Senior Citizens League (TSCL), a non-partisan group. “This money would be much better spent helping the millions of seniors who are living below the poverty line and struggling to keep their heat on this winter.” However, at 2.8 percent, the automatic raise that lawmakers receive is only half as large as the 2009 cost of living adjustment of Social Security recipients. Still, Steve Ellis, vice president of the budget watchdog Taxpayers for Common Sense, said Congress should have taken the rare step of freezing its pay, as lawmakers did in 2000. “Look at the way the economy is and how most people aren’t counting on a holiday bonus or a pay raise — they’re just happy to have gainful employment,” said Ellis. “But you have the lawmakers who are set up and ready to get their next installment of a pay raise and go happily along their way.” Member raises are often characterized as examples of wasteful spending, especially when many constituents and businesses in members’ districts are in financial despair. Rep. Harry Mitchell, a first-term Democrat from Arizona, sponsored legislation earlier this year that would have prevented the automatic pay adjustments from kicking in for members next year. But the bill, which attracted 34 cosponsors, failed to make it out of committee. “They don’t even go through the front door. They have it set up so that it’s wired so that you actually have to undo the pay raise rather than vote for a pay raise,” Ellis said. Freezing congressional salaries is hardly a new idea on Capitol Hill. Lawmakers have floated similar proposals in every year dating back to 1995, and long before that. Though the concept of forgoing a raise has attracted some support from more senior members, it is most popular with freshman lawmakers, who are often most vulnerable. In 2006, after the Republican-led Senate rejected an increase to the minimum wage, Democrats, who had just come to power in the House with a slew of freshmen, vowed to block their own pay raise until the wage increase was passed. The minimum wage was eventually increased and lawmakers received their automatic pay hike. In the beginning days of 1789, Congress was paid only $6 a day, which would be about $75 daily by modern standards. But by 1965 members were receiving $30,000 a year, which is the modern equivalent of about $195,000. Currently the average lawmaker makes $169,300 a year, with leadership making slightly more. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) makes $217,400, while the minority and majority leaders in the House and Senate make $188,100. Ellis said that while freezing the pay increase would be a step in the right direction, it would be better to have it set up so that members would have to take action, and vote, for a pay raise and deal with the consequences, rather than get one automatically. “It is probably never going to be politically popular to raise Congress’s salary,” he said. “I don’t think you’re going to find taxpayers saying, ‘Yeah I think I should pay my congressman more’.”

Don't link Islam to terror, Islamic chief urges

GENEVA (Reuters) – The world's top diplomat for Islam called on Friday for an end to what he termed efforts to equate the religion with terrorism and said the 'demonization' of Muslims around the world must be fought.

But speaking soon after the U.N. General Assembly passed an Islamic-sponsored resolution condemning "defamation of religion" for the fourth year in a row, Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu said his group was committed to respecting freedom of expression.

There was a "rising tide of incitement to religious hatred and discrimination and intolerance targeting Muslims," he told a meeting called by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) at the United Nations in Geneva. The 57-nation OIC, based in Saudi Arabia, represents 1.5 billion Muslims.

"Attempts to equate Islam with terrorism should be stopped. Stereotyping and demonization of Muslims should be combated," said Ihsanoglu, a Turkish history professor who became OIC Secretary-General in 2005.

In a statement on Ihsanoglu's remarks, Geneva spokesman for the International Humanist and Ethical Union Roy Brown argued that Islam was often linked to terror because perpetrators of many terrorist acts identify themselves as Muslims.

Critics of the OIC -- including countries who voted against the "defamation" motion at U.N. headquarters in New York on Thursday -- say many Islamic states use defamation or "blasphemy" laws against minorities and free-thinkers.

Referring to the U.N. vote, in which for the first time since the OIC introduced a "defamation" motion in 2005 more countries voted against or abstained than voted for, Ihsanoglu said the motives of the Islamic grouping were misunderstood.

FREEDOM OF SPEECH

The aim of the OIC, he declared, "is not to protect religion against critics based on objective and rational interrogation." The body, he added, "is firmly committed to respect for freedom of expression, which is a fundamental human right."

In a statement issued earlier this week, watchdogs on freedom of expression for the U.N.'s Human Rights Council and for key regional inter-state organizations in Africa, Europe and Latin America called for an end to "defamation" resolutions.

The four, three of them prominent developing country human rights lawyers, said that where "blasphemy" laws existed they had often been used "to prevent legitimate criticism of powerful religious leaders and to suppress the views of minorities, dissenting believers and non-believers."

In an echo of their comments, U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay told Friday's meeting that when criticism of religion became incitement to hatred "urgent but proportionate" action should be taken.

But, she added, "speech critical of religions does not necessarily constitute such incitement" and that it should always be assessed "stressing the importance of protecting the rights of both religious minorities and non-believers alike."

(Editing by Stephanie Nebehay and Ralph Boulton)

Jobs go begging at Northrop Grumman

The defense contractor is offering cash and free dinner inducements to applicants to fill hundreds of positions. There's a catch: Many jobs require highly specialized skills and a security clearance.

By Peter Pae

It's an increasingly rare sight these days, but Northrop Grumman Corp. has been putting out help-wanted signs all over town.

The huge defense contractor has flown sky banners with "Northrop Grumman is hiring" over Southland beaches and during a USC football game, has placed ads on company shuttle buses, and has even offered $100 plus a free dinner for potential hires to come check them out.

Despite perhaps the biggest pool of unemployed workers looking for jobs in decades, Northrop officials say they haven't been able to fill the open positions.

This year it has hired 1,800 workers for its Integrated Systems division in Southern California but still has another 1,800 openings for engineers, machinists, mechanics and computer programmers.

In a cruel twist for thousands of job-seekers, Northrop says a vast majority of the applicants -- the company gets 30,000 resumes a week -- don't qualify. And many who do qualify already have good jobs with rivals who are doing all they can to keep them.

Century City-based Northrop is the nation's third-largest defense contractor and the second-largest private employer in Southern California. In the last year or so it has won several major multi-billion-dollar government contracts.

Few qualify because many of the jobs require highly specialized or esoteric skills. Consider the latest opening at Northrop for a "cryogenic propellant management engineer." If you need to ask what it is, then you probably don't qualify. For most of us, it has something to do with really cold rocket fuel used for NASA's lunar lander. The bottom line is that there aren't many people who have any experience in the area of cryogenic propellants.

Adding to the hiring difficulty is that most of the jobs require that the employee have a government security clearance.

"It's a quandary for us," said Emitte Scruggs, director of staffing for Northrop's Integrated Systems sector. "Even when we do find someone, they can't get the clearance. I know it sounds odd, but we're having a tough time hiring."

Moonbeam Brown wants Constitution thrown out – caters to rad/gays

(San Francisco Chronicle) Despite being responsible for defending the laws of California, AG Jerry Brown has announced he won't defend Prop. 8 against challenges, and, instead, tells the court the voter-approved gay-marriage ban should be invalidated ...

Nouriel Roubini: The $700 Billion Bailout Isn’t Enough

by Luke Mullins

I spoke with the bearish—but prescient—economist Nouriel Roubini on Wednesday about what's in store for the economy, housing, and stock markets in 2009. Here's what he had to say:

What is your outlook for the length and depth of the recession?

My view is that that recession is going to continue at least through the end of 2009. It started in December 2007, so it's going to be 24 months long. It's going to be the longest we've had in the last 60 years. I expect a cumulative fall in output from the peak of 4 to 5 percent. Just to give you a sense, in the last recession, the cumulative fall in output was only 0.4 percent—this one is 10 times deeper. The unemployment rate will peak at above 9 percent sometime in 2010. And we're facing not just a U.S. recession but a global recession. There is a recession in all of the advanced economies, and now there is the beginning of a hard landing also in the emerging markets.

What are the main factors behind the recession?

Initially, it was the excesses in the U.S. housing market, but we have discovered that those excesses were not limited only to housing. The household sector was highly leveraged—subprime, prime, credit cards, auto loans, student loans. There was a releveraging of the financial system, with massive amounts of excessive leverage and risk taking. That led to the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression and, because of securitization, we spread it to the rest of the world. Also easy money from the Fed—they pushed down the federal funds rate and kept it too low for too long—and lax supervision of financial institutions played a role. So a number of different factors [triggered the crisis].

What's your outlook for housing?

Well, between 1996 and 2006, real home prices doubled. So just to go back to the previous level—without undershooting—you need a fall in real terms of 50 percent in home prices. You can achieve 40 percent of that through nominal falling home prices and 10 percent of it through inflation. That means that home prices have to fall at least 40 percent [from the peak]. And they have fallen, as of today, from their peak of 2006 by 25 percent. I expect them to fall at least another 15 percent or maybe even 20—so a cumulative fall in home prices in nominal terms of at least 40 percent, possibly 45. And the housing recession has not bottomed out. The data yesterday about housing starts and building permits suggested that it's a total disaster in housing, and there is no bottom to it. This is the worst housing recession since the Great Depression.

Do you think stocks have bottomed?

No, I don't think so. Of course, in the last few weeks we have been in another bear market rally, but bear market rallies have occurred for the last 12 months. Markets rally after shocks, and then shocks come and they fall further. But I see another downside to U.S. and global equities of at least 15 to 20 percent from current levels for three reasons. One is that the news about the economy—both in the U.S. and abroad—is going to be much worse then expected. The numbers have been just awful, and they are going to get worse. Two, there is still a lot of delusion about what earnings are going to be in 2009. And three, I think that there are going to be many more financial shocks, other large institutions going bust—highly leveraged institutions like hedge funds.

The financial shocks are not over, and the credit losses are going to mount because they are spreading from subprime to prime to credit cards to auto loans to student loans to leveraged loans to municipal bonds to industrial and commercial loans to corporate bonds. We have to take about $2 trillion of credit losses and so far nearly half of it has been recognized. So I see another wave of massive credit losses that is going to worsen the credit crunch.

Would you say then that the credit crisis is at its halfway point?

Well, we're still in the middle of it. We are still in the deepest part of this credit crunch. Look at corporate credit spreads—they are unprecedented. We are nowhere near the bottom. The credit crunch is as painful now as it has been. And so far, everything the Fed has done in its massive quantitative easing has not made much of a difference as far as corporate credit spreads.

What is your opinion of the government's response to the credit crisis so far?

My first observation would be that even if they do everything right, the recession is going to proceed through the end of next year. I don't think that there is anything that the government can do at this point to reverse that. What they can do is to try to ensure that there is at least the beginning of an economic recovery toward the end of next year and into 2010. What needs to be done is actually many different things. The first thing is we need a huge fiscal stimulus because private demand, consumption, and spending are collapsing. So you need a huge stimulus—$500 billion to $700 billion of government spending in infrastructure, money to state and local governments, unemployment benefits. The usual range of things.

The second thing you need is to more aggressively recapitalize the financial institutions, not just banks but broker dealers, finance companies, and insurance companies. And there is only $350 billion of TARP [Treasury Asset Relief Program] money left. We are going to spend all of that, and we are going to need a TARP II because in order to cover all the losses you will need more than $1 trillion. Three, you need to reduce the debt burden of the households that are insolvent. Loan modifications are meaningless. You need debt reduction, similar to what we did during the Great Depression with the [Home Owners' Loan Corp.]—the government buying up the mortgage, reducing its face value, and converting [the loans] from variable rates to long-term fixed rates. And all of these things have to be done in a cohesive, consistent way showing that you have a plan of action because otherwise you're not signaling credibility to the market.

What advice do you have for President-elect Obama?

First of all, he has a great team. He doesn't need my advice; he has excellent people like Tim Geithner and Larry Summers—they are people that know markets, know policy, know the financial sector and the economy. The advice is essentially a combination of aggressive fiscal policy, more aggressive recapitalization of financial institutions, and plans to reduce the debt burden of the household sector, and the Fed continuing to do aggressive quantitative easing.

Are we headed for a depression?

I don't believe we are going to be in a depression—we could end up like Japan that had essentially economic stagnation for a decade with deflation. You know, the "L"-shaped recession. At this point the "U"-shaped recession could turn into an "L"-shaped recession if we don't fix the financial system, and the credit crisis becomes worse and if we don't get a massive fiscal stimulus. So, a lot depends on our policy reaction. If our policy reaction is appropriate, by 2010 there will be some recovery of growth. The only risk is that the recovery of growth could be so weak that it feels like a recession even though we are technically out of it. So there is a risk of something like a Japanese-style, multiyear economic stagnation. I would not rule it out, but it is not my benchmark scenario. I think there is a one-third probability it will end up that way, but a two-thirds probability that we will end up in a severe, two-year-long recession. And that would be by any standard the worst recession that the U.S. has experienced in the last 60 years.

Doubts Remain 20 Years After Lockerbie

by Associated Press

LONDON(AP) -- Much of the political fallout from the Lockerbie air disaster has been resolved, but doubts remain about who was behind the explosion 20 years ago Sunday in the skies above Scotland.

A cancer-stricken Libyan secret agent is in prison, the sole person convicted in the tragedy, but he has earned a second appeal by convincing judges that ''a miscarriage of justice'' may have occurred during his trial.

Some of the victims' families are still not convinced that Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi, 56, is to blame for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which killed 259 people, mostly Americans, in the air, and 11 more on the ground. Al-Megrahi, convicted in January, 2001, is serving a life sentence.

The Rev. John Mosey, whose 19-year-old daughter Helga was killed on the flight, attended all but one week of al-Megrahi's nine-month trial before deciding the Libyan was probably not responsible.

''I came away from the court 85 percent convinced he did not do it, based on the evidence I heard,'' said Mosey, from Cumbria, England. ''He was convicted on circumstantial evidence and not beyond all reasonable doubt.''

Mosey is putting his faith in the appeal set to be heard next year -- if al-Megrahi lives that long. The prisoner is suffering from incurable prostate cancer that has spread to other parts of his body, but his lawyer's bid to free him on humanitarian grounds has failed.

Mosey thinks the bombing may have been carried out by a Palestinian organization backed by Syria and Iran, as many believed in the immediate aftermath. He thinks the focus was shifted to Libya -- an archenemy of then-President Ronald Reagan -- for political reasons.

''Sadly, I believe there is not the political will to catch the real perpetrators and this terrible case will remain unsolved,'' he said.

Mosey plans to deliver a sermon at a memorial service at London's Heathrow Airport on the 20th anniversary, with other commemorations set for the village of Lockerbie.

''In the first five to 10 years after her death I thought about her every single day, every hour,'' he said of his daughter. ''Twenty years on, time heals to some degree, but I still think about her very often.'' Al-Megrahi was granted a new appeal in June, 2007, after his lawyers claimed British and U.S. authorities tampered with evidence, disregarded witness statements and steered investigators away from suggestions the bombing was an Iranian-financed plot carried out by Palestinians to avenge the shooting down of a civilian Iranian airliner by U.S. forces several months earlier.

In a statement summarizing its 800-page report, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission said it had found new evidence that led its members to believe ''that the applicant may have suffered a miscarriage of justice.''

That view is rejected by almost all of the Americans who lost family members in the explosion, said Kara Weipz of Cherry Hill, N.J., whose late brother was on board.

''Most people absolutely, unequivocally believe it was al-Megrahi,'' said Weipz, president of the Victims of Pan Am Flight 103 group. ''His guilt was never in doubt.''

The Palestinian groups suspected of being involved have steadfastly denied any link to the plot.

The dynamics of the case have changed in recent years as Libyan leader Col. Moammar Gadhafi has engineered a rapprochement with the West in the dangerous times following the 9/11 attacks on Washington and New York.

The self-styled revolutionary leader, who once seemed to thrive on confrontation, has renounced terrorism and voluntarily dismantled his clandestine program to develop nuclear weapons.

Britain, the United States and Libya are friendly now, publicly committed to working together to contain the threat of international terrorism.

Libya has paid out several billion dollars to the families of Lockerbie victims, and has accepted ''general responsibility'' for the attack.

U.S. officials, and the families involved, said in November that Libya had made the final compensation payments. These acts of contrition have allowed Libya to restore diplomatic ties to Britain and the United States and to curtail United Nations-imposed sanctions.

Former U.S. intelligence officer Bob Ayers, now a terrorism analyst at Chatham House in London, said Gadhafi was able to ''rehabilitate'' Libya by accepting responsibility for Lockerbie and paying compensation.

''This was ultimately good for the world,'' he said. ''But these were decisions reached by Gadhafi and Libya, not actions imposed by the court. To my way of thinking, there are still doubts as to whether the prosecution was done in such a way to result in a safe conviction.''

Ayers said the Lockerbie explosion was ''a seminal event'' in modern terrorism that had led to a massive revamp of airline safety procedures designed to keep bombs from being smuggled onto planes.

''It's been a constant battle since then between the authorities and the terrorists,'' he said.

Although most of the victims' families have accepted the compensation deal, which paid out $10 million per victim, some close relatives who have not been included in the deal are trying without success to sue the Libyan government.

Washington lawyer Mark Zaid, who represents about 20 families, said that since the U.S. government and Libya regard the matter as closed there is no forum he can use to seek money for those who were left out.

''These families have been forgotten,'' he said, describing how some parents and adult siblings did not receive any part of the settlement, which usually went to spouses or children. ''The hard and cold truth is that as far as the government is concerned the issue with Libya has been resolved, and if a few stragglers are left out, they don't care.''

Expert: TSA Screening Is Security Theater

(CBS) Even as Transportation Security Administration officials beef up airline security with expensive new technology, a prominent security expert, Bruce Schneier, who has advised the TSA, tells 60 Minutes correspondent Lesley Stahl the TSA's efforts are largely "security theater" - a show to make passengers feel safe.

Schneier says truly effective security starts before the airport, with intelligence on terrorists, in a report to be broadcast this Sunday, Dec. 21, at 7 p.m. ET/PT.

"'Security theater,' It's a phrase I coined for security measures that look good, but don’t actually do anything," says Schneier, referring to the security measures that irritate airline passengers every day and that have cost billions of dollars.

That assessment angers Kip Hawley, the Bush Administration’s outgoing head of the TSA. "This isn’t theater. This is war," he tells Stahl. Hawley argues that all the security and especially the technical improvements have made people safer. ....

Durban II

from ACT for America

“Durban II” is the UN conference scheduled for April, 2009, ostensibly to address issues such as racism. With Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as Vice-Chairperson, such a conference would be a joke if it didn’t have such explosive and dangerous implications for worldwide freedom.

The draft document for the conference makes clear the threat it poses. It contains condemnations of “Islamophobia” and is an all-out assault against Israel and against speech that allegedly “defames” Islam.

This is the declared agenda of Islamists worldwide – to silence criticism of Islam. If they succeed, if countries in the West knuckle under to these fascist tactics, the long-term prospects of our resisting the tide of radical Islam will be dim indeed.

For the United States to attend this conference would be to legitimize these blatant assaults on free speech and legitimize the seething hatred, intolerance and anti-Semitism openly espoused by the likes of Ahmadinejad.

Please read the notice below and contact President-Elect Obama and/or Secretary of State-Designate Clinton at the contact information provided. They need to hear from us that it is categorically unacceptable for the United States to attend and legitimize this UN sponsored “hate-fest.”

Make your voice heard. Say “NO” to “Durban II.”

---

From The Washington Times, December 11, 2008.

The United States Should not Attend Any Aspect of the Anti-Semitic Durban II Conference
Elie Wiesel, Nobel Prize Laureate*	Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School	William Bennett, Former Secretary of Education	R. James Woolsey, Former Director, Central Intelligence	Bernard Lewis, Professor Emeritus, Princeton University
Martin Peretz, Editor-in-Chief, The New Republic	Michael Steinhardt, The Steinhardt Foundation	Sir Harold Evans, Author, The American Century	Norman Podhoretz, Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipient	James Q. Wilson, Presidential Medal of Freedom Recipient
Herbert I. London, Chairman Governing Council of the American Jewish Congress	Ali H. Alyami, Center for Democracy and Human Rights In Saudi Arabia	Michael Ledeen, Freedom Scholar	Seth Leibsohn, Fellow, Claremont Institute	Anne Bayefsky, EYEontheUN.org
Frank Macchiarola, President, St. Francis College	Brian T. Kennedy, President, The Claremont Institute	Leon Wieseltier, Literary Editor, The New Republic	Victor Davis Hanson, Senior Fellow, The Hoover Institute	Father Alexander Karloutsos, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Manda Zand-Ervin, Alliance of Iranian Women	Dr. Phyllis Chesler, Author, Emerita Professor, CUNY	Shanaveon E. Pious, Ph.D., Chairman of Entrepreneurs University	Nina Rosenwald, Human Rights Voices	M. Zuhdi Jasser, M.D., President, American Islamic Forum for Democracy
* Resigned in protest from the group of eminent personalities before Durban I.

Join us in calling for the United States to say YES to racial and religious equality and freedom from anti-semitism by saying NO to attending the United Nations Durban II Conference. A 2008 U.S. State Department report on global anti-semitism highlighted the malicious role played by the 2001 United Nations Durban I Conference.

Durban I was, IN THEORY, intended to be an "anti-racism" conference. It was, in practice, anything but… Durban I ended just three days before 9/11. So deeply disturbed that the conference was hijacked by global harbingers of hate, that the United States and Israeli delegations walked out on principle in protest.

The agenda for Durban II? Scheduled for April 2009 the stated purpose of Durban II is to "further the implementation of the (2001) Durban Declaration." What does the Durban Declaration declare? That ISRAEL, and ONLY ISRAEL, is guilty of racism. And who sits on the Planning Committee for the Durban II Conference?

Make no mistake, this conference will not combat racism, but will promote and fuel hatred toward Israel, America and the free world. This conference will not be about the spread of free expression, but how to curb it. The United States has always been a world leader in the battle against anti-semitism. We walked away once in protest... let us now stay away on principle. Today, there is an immediate way to act against growing anti-semitism around the world ... say no to Durban II. Declare that the United States will not participate in a dialogue that promotes prejudice.

The United States has consistently opposed Durban II, its funding and planning. The latest October 2008 documents from the Planning Committee confirm that the Durban II platform will be used to demonize Israel and launch an attack on free speech. We ask President-elect Obama and Secretary of State-designate Clinton to take the next step and deny legitimacy to Durban II. We urge the United States to join the lead of Canada and Israel by announcing now that the U.S. will not fund or attend Durban II. Please make your views known-Write to the president-elect, secretary of state designate and Others-tell them to say no NOW, that America DECLINES to participate in the upcoming Durban II International Hatefest.

CONTACT INFORMATION:
Secretary of State-Designate Hillary Clinton: 202-647-4000; website	President-Elect Barack Obama: 202-456-1111; email now!	Congressman Howard Berman (Chair, House Foreign Affairs Committee): 202-225-5021, 202-225-4695 website	Senator John Kerry: 202-224-2742, 202-224-8525; website
Sponsored by Lawrence Kadish, Human Rights Voices

U.S. General Eyes Nuclear Weapon Improvements

WASHINGTON -- A key Air Force nuclear official said recently the United States might seek to improve its nuclear arsenal with such features as enhanced stealth or extended range -- ideas that could prove controversial on Capitol Hill (see GSN, Sept. 12).

Under a "heavy modernization" effort, the United States could extend the service lives of the aging nuclear stockpile as well as retrofit weapons with updated technologies, according to Brig. Gen. Everett Thomas, commander of the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center at Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. (see GSN, Nov. 11).

"You could look at [a] low-observable aeroshell," he said in a telephone interview, referring to a re-entry vehicle that carries a nuclear warhead to its target. "You could look at extended range, because we now know how to do solid propellant much better than we did in the past. You could look at many things when you look at a modernization."

Some lawmakers might not agree. ....

U.S. Completes Small-Scale Sarin Neutralization Project

Sarin nerve agent held in three decaying containers at the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky has been safely neutralized, the Associated Press reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 10).

The Army ordered the disposal project after one of the containers was found to be leaking in August 2007. Wastewater produced through the chemical neutralization process must still be destroyed at a private facility in Port Arthur, Texas.

Blue Grass is years away from beginning disposal of its entire chemical stockpile as required by the international Chemical Weapons Convention (Associated Press/WKYT.com, Dec. 18).

U.S. Bolstered Counterterrorism Efforts in 2008, Homeland Security Says

The U.S. Homeland Security Department made significant strides in 2008 to protect the country from potential attacks involving chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear weapons, the agency said yesterday in a year-end assessment of its activities (see GSN, Nov. 6).

The department's counterterrorism progress fits within its overarching goals of bolstering disaster preparedness and response abilities, streamlining its own organization, safeguarding vital infrastructure, and working to prevent dangerous goods and individuals from infiltrating the country, according to an agency statement.

The Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate pursued new technologies to scan U.S.-bound cargo for potential WMD ingredients, the release says.

The department also published a new strategy aimed at preventing small boats from carrying weapons of mass destruction into the country (see GSN, April 28; U.S. Homeland Security Department release I, Dec. 18). ....

Anthrax Attacks Less Likely Today, U.S. Army Officer Says

A senior U.S. Army officer yesterday said that security measures put in place since the 2001 anthrax mailings would make it difficult for someone to conduct a similar campaign today, the Associated Press reported (see GSN, Oct. 27).

"I can't say for certain it could not happen today. ... But it would be much more difficult," said Maj. Gen. Robert Lennox, Army assistant deputy chief of staff.

Lennox noted that military services have approved increased camera surveillance and adopted new security measures for 12 laboratories used for research of anthrax and other lethal agents.....

Russia Offers Nuclear Restraint If U.S. Backs Off Missile Defense Plans

(Compiler's note: Ever heard of a "sucker punch"?)

A U.S. agreement to halt missile interceptor deployments in Europe would persuade Russia to halt its own work on new strategic weapons, Moscow indicated today (see GSN, Dec. 17). ....

Obama to Assign Top Liaison for Iran, Official Says

from Global Security Newswire

U.S. President-elect Barack Obama is expected to assign a high-level foreign policy official to oversee efforts to engage Iran on its nuclear program and other issues, the Washington Times reported today (see GSN, Dec. 18).

Obama has expressed interest in pursuing dialogue with Iran aimed at achieving a halt to activities in the Middle Eastern state that could support nuclear weapons development. Iran has defended its nuclear program as a strictly civilian effort.

"The idea is that the position should build on the existing diplomatic framework," a State Department official said.

Independent analysts supported claims about the new diplomatic post.

"There is every indication that they are seriously considering going this way," said Patrick Clawson, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy's deputy research director. National Iranian American Council head Trita Parsi also agreed that the incoming administration planned to establish the position.

The post is necessary to help coordinate Iran work across the U.S. government, said Suzanne Maloney, an Iran expert at the Brookings institution. "There is a huge interagency component to this," she said.

John Bolton, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, warned that Iran is not likely to halt its disputed nuclear work in exchange for financial and political benefits. "We've lost the (nuclear) race with Iran," he said.

A high-level diplomat is likely to receive the new post, even though coordinating positions are typically provided to midranking officials, according to the State Department source. Contenders include Dennis Ross, a former envoy in Israeli-Arab talks, and Ryan Crocker, now U.S. ambassador to Iraq, the official said.

James Dobbins, a former Bush administration diplomat and another prospective candidate, yesterday said the State Department should permit its envoys to regularly communicate with Iranian diplomats (Eli Lake, Washington Times, Dec. 19).

Meanwhile, The French parliament this week completed a report warning that an Iranian nuclear weapon could become reality in the next three years, the Associated Press reported. "Iran's access to the nuclear bomb is seen as inevitable and very dangerous, notably because of the risks of escalation with the United States," the report says.

The document is notable because "we state more clearly than others our belief that they are on the threshold of the nuclear weapon," said Jean-Louis Bianco, a French Socialist Party legislator who oversaw the report's creation.

The report also advocates "extremely open" multilateral discussions with Iran to address its nuclear activities, he said.

During a trip to Paris, former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu yesterday urged the international community to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear bomb.

"We have never had a situation in the history of the world in which a radical regime with a retrograde ideology and apparently known ambitions on the use of force will get access to the weapons of mass death," Netanyahu said. "The coming year or two -- this is the time table we are talking about -- will be a pivot of history. ... If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, then a terribly dangerous threshold will be crossed," he added (Associated Press/Google News, Dec. 18).

Elsewhere, U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey has declined to participate in the probe of a Manhattan property partly owned by an Iran-linked firm he helped represent in the 1980s, the Washington Post reported today.

The Alavi Foundation co-owns an office building with a firm suspected of funneling rental profits to an Iranian bank linked to Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programs. Newsday reported in 1995 that the foundation itself was directed by senior Iranian clerics and that high-level officials in the organization had been connected to exports of weapons and technology to Iran (Glenn Kessler, Washington Post, Dec. 19).

FEDERAL LAWSUIT FILED AGAINST TREASURY SECRETARY TO STOP AIG BAILOUT FINANCING OF TERRORIST ACTIVITIES

(Compiler's note: This is an explosive new development -- must read -- that is sure to raise government, media and public awareness of the danger inherent in U.S. businesses entangling themselves in Shariah-compliant finance. As we noted last week, “Shariah-compliant” finance means just that – compliance with Shariah law, which, among other things, oppresses women and calls for Jihad against infidels. Below is the press release the Thomas More Law Center issued yesterday. There will likely be much more information to pass along to you in the days and weeks to come.)


from ACT for America

ANN ARBOR, MI - A federal lawsuit was filed this morning against U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson, Jr. and the Federal Reserve Board to stop all bailout funds from going to American International Group, Inc. ("AIG"). According to the lawsuit, the U.S. government, through its ownership of AIG, is not only violating the Constitution, but also promoting and financing the destruction of America using American tax dollars.

The basis of the lawsuit is that AIG intentionally promotes Shariah-compliant businesses and insurance products, which by necessity must comply with the 1200 year old body of Islamic cannon law based on the Quran, which demands the conversion, subjugation, or destruction of the infidel West, including the United States. To help achieve these objectives and with the aid of federal tax dollars, AIG employs a three-person Shariah Advisory Board, with members from Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and Pakistan. According to AIG, the role of its Shariah authority "is to review [its] operations, supervise its development of Islamic products, and determine Shariah compliance of these products and [its] investments."

Of particular significance is the Pakistani Board member, Dr. Muhammed Imran Ashraf Usmani. Dr. Usmani is the son and devoted disciple of Sheik Mufti Taqi Usmani, the leading authority on Shariah financing who, in 1999, authored a book dedicating an entire chapter on why a Western Muslim must engage in violent jihad against his own country - even if Muslims are given equality and freedom to practice their religion and to proselytize.

The lawsuit was filed in the Federal District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on behalf of Kevin J. Murray, a former Marine infantryman who served two tours of duty in Iraq. Murray is represented by the Thomas More Law Center, a national public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and David Yerushalmi, an associated attorney who specializes in litigation and is an expert on Shariah law and Shariah compliant financing. Mr. Yerushalmi also serves as general counsel to the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C.

According to the lawsuit, use of taxpayer funds to acquire ownership of a business that intentionally promotes, endorses, supports, and funds Shariah-based Islamic religious practices violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, commented, "This lawsuit not only raises significant constitutional issues, it also shines a light on serious national security issues that our own government has created by direct financial support and ownership of a business that supports anti-American, radical Islamic activities. Make no mistake, there is an internal cultural jihad underway against our great nation, and I fear that many of our political leaders are unwittingly complicit in it."

On September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorists, guided by principles of Shariah-mandated jihad against "infidels," attacked and killed thousands of innocent American civilians. Shortly thereafter, the U.S. went on the offensive by engaging Islamic terrorists overseas in Iraq and in Afghanistan. As in the past when our Nation faced great crisis, American servicemen were called to action, and Kevin Murray answered the call. From March to October 2003, Murray - a U.S. Marine - was deployed overseas in support of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Yet today, Murray's federal tax dollars are being used to advance the very cause of global jihad he and his fellow servicemen were placed in harm's way to overcome. Shariah explicitly demands the murder of infidels like Kevin Murray and the destruction of the United States, which Murray took an oath to defend. Shariah is the same law that is used to justify beheadings, stonings, and amputation for petty crimes in places like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Sudan, which Americans deplore.

Nevertheless, AIG acknowledges and boasts its promotion of Shariah law and Shariah-based business practices. AIG itself describes "Sharia" as "Islamic law based on the Quran and the teachings of the Prophet [Mohammed]."

In further support of the federal government's endorsement of Shariah, the U.S. Treasury department co-sponsored a seminar in November of this year entitled "Islamic Financing 101" to promote Shariah financing among American institutions. The Seminar was jointly sponsored by Harvard University, one of the many American universities and colleges receiving millions of dollars from oil-producing countries to influence their Middle East programs, which are often staffed with professors who are anti-American, anti-Israeli, and pro-Islamic.

"It is clear," said Thompson, "oil money is purchasing the sovereignty of the United States and whatever loyalty to America these greedy financial institutions, corporations, and universities have left. It's up to the American people to take back their country from those who so easily betray its interests."

The federal lawsuit challenges that portion of the "Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008" that appropriated $40 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the United States government's majority ownership interest in AIG, which engages in Shariah-based Islamic religious activities that are anti-Christian, anti-Jewish, and anti-American.

According to the lawsuit, through the use of taxpayer funds, the U.S. government acquired a majority (79.9%) ownership interest in AIG, and as part of the bailout, Congress appropriated and expended an additional $40 billion of taxpayer money to fund and financially support AIG and its financial activities. AIG, which is now a government owned company, engages in Shariah-compliant financing, which subjects certain financial activities, including investments, to the dictates of Islamic law and the Islamic religion. This specifically includes any profits or interest obtained through such financial activities.

An important element of Shariah-compliant financing is a form of obligatory charitable contribution called zakat, which is a religious tax for assisting those that "struggle [jihad] for Allah." The amount of this tax is between 2.5% and 20%, depending upon the source of the wealth. The zakat religious tax is used to financially support Islamic "charities," some of which have ties to terrorist organizations that are hostile to the United States and all other "infidels," which includes Christians and Jews.

The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, recently convicted for providing material support to Islamic terrorist organizations, is an example of an Islamic "charity" that qualifies for receipt of the zakat. Thus, as a direct consequence of the taxpayer funds appropriated and expended to purchase and financially support AIG, the U.S. government is now the owner of a corporation engaged in the business of collecting religious taxes to fund interests adverse to the United States, Christians, Jews, and all other "infidels" under Islamic law.

Continued Thompson, "This lawsuit is as much about protecting constitutional principles as it is about protecting our national security and preventing another 9/11 - whether it be overt through flying planes into buildings or covert through appropriating taxpayer money to fund an Islamic cultural jihad."

The lawsuit seeks a court order to stop the taxpayer funding of AIG and its Islamic-based businesses and activities.

The Thomas More Law Center has been involved in several cases dealing with the insidious threat of radical Islam. Law Center attorney Robert Muise, who is handling this case involving AIG, is also one of the Law Center's attorneys defending LtCol Jeffrey Chessani, USMC, the senior officer charged in the so-called "Haditha Massacre" case. Those charges were dismissed by a military judge, and the government has appealed that ruling. Muise is also representing former Marine Jesse Nieto, whose anti-Islamic terrorism message was recently banned by military authorities at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune because of some unknown complaints.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America's Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization.

Click here for additional information.

Fort Dix trial's sequestered jury a rarity

from

Philadelphia

CAMDEN, N.J. (Map, News) - A jury considering the case of five New Jersey men accused of plotting an attack on the Army's Fort Dix has finished its first day of deliberations without reaching a verdict.

On Wednesday afternoon, the jury asked a judge for transcripts of testimony from government informant Besnik Bakalli on days government lawyers questioned him. Bakalli said the suspects used a trip to Pennsylvania's Pocono Mountains to train for waging a holy war.

The suspects face life in prison if they're convicted of the most serious charges, which include conspiracy to kill military personnel and attempted murder.

Defense lawyers told jurors their clients - all foreign-born Muslims who lived for years in Cherry Hill, N.J. - were not seriously planning anything.

Chemical Security Services Group Formed

A group of highly experienced security and emergency management professionals recently announced they have formed Chemical Security Services to assist chemical facilities in complying with complex security regulations contained in the Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS). ....

Obama's unsavory ties

by Warren H. Williams

It was generous of The Bee to turn over a four-column swath of opinion page space to allow Bill Ayers of Illinois, co-founder of the Weather Underground, to lament how unfairly the press had treated him during the recent presidential campaign, seemingly because of his friendship with the winner, Barack Obama (" 'Domestic terrorist' tells his story," Dec. 9, Page A-11).

Yes, he conceded, some Weathermen had planted bombs in the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon among various empty offices during the Vietnam War, but it was all peace-loving and of good intent, and he would have been glad to rationally discuss it during the recent campaign except for the "frenzy of fear" generated by the press.

By embarrassing coincidence, on the same day, another Illinois politician, Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich, was making national headlines after allegedly demanding, in a phone conservation taped by federal crime probers, a payoff for the appointment of Obama's successor as U.S. senator. As background, the Wall Street Journal cited a list of other top Illinois politicos charged over the years with a variety of crimes including bribery, conspiracy, fraud and perjury. The headline read "Obama ties in the spotlight." ....

Screening of anti-Islam film stopped

STRASBOURG, Dec 17: The European Parliament banned a planned screening on Wednesday of an anti-Islam film made by far-right Dutch MP Geert Wilders, a British euro-deputy said.

“The banning of this film is a direct attack on free speech,” claimed British Independent MEP Gerard Batten, who had organised the event. ....

Briton guilty of directing terror

A British man has become the first al-Qaeda suspect convicted in the UK of directing terrorism, following a trial at Manchester Crown Court. ....

WAL-MART SAYS YES TO PARENTS - REMOVES "ISLAM IS THE LIGHT" DOLL

(Compiler's note: Many of you are following the news about the Mattel doll that says “Islam is the Light.” The release below from “MAMA” (Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability) has good news.

We commend and thank “MAMA” for its activism, and thank those of you who have taken action on this. This is an excellent example of how our citizens can play a role in the effort to roll back the tide of radical Islam.

We also commend Wal-Mart and its managers for their positive response to the concerns that have been conveyed to them. Thank you Wal-Mart!!

On the other hand, the release below reveals that Target has not been responsive at all. To find out more click on the link below.)


Parents Campaign Focuses on Target, Kmart and Toys R US

December 16, 2008 - Washington, DC: Wal-Mart managers are removing the Mattel doll that says "Islam is the Light" from store shelves, according to reports from parents and the media across the U.S. and Canada, as well as Wal-Mart employees. Many Wal-Mart managers have removed the controversial doll in the last two weeks, and others are removing it as soon as parents ask.

The Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability (MAMA) campaign to remove the doll began in late November on "Black" Friday, the year's biggest shopping day. The national MAMA campaign started as a response to parent concerns about the Mattel/Fisher Price "Little Mommy Real Loving Baby Cuddle and Coo Doll." The majority of "Little Mommy Cuddle and Coo" dolls on store shelves have an audio soundtrack that says "Islam is the Light," with no label or warning to parents on the doll's packaging that it advocates Islam to their young children, a practice known as "Dawa." MAMA has advised parents in the U.S. and Canada to ask retailers either to remove the doll from the shelves or to attach a label stating "NOTICE: This doll says "Islam is the light," an invitation to your child to join Islam." MAMA is concerned that an invitation to Islam is a material risk to young girls, because of the discriminatory Islamic law known as Shariah, and wants parents informed about the doll's statement before they purchase the doll.

"Parents are reporting that most Wal-Marts have already removed the doll, or immediately remove it when asked," said Denise Lee, founder of Moms Ask Mattel for Accountability. "And TV and newspaper stories are reporting the same policy changes. MAMA applauds Wal-Mart for taking the lead here in responding to parents' concerns, especially over the Christmas season."

Wal-Mart staff at the Wal-Mart customer "Urgent Assistance" complaint phones were helpful and frank about customer complaints about the "Islam is the Light" doll. Lee spoke with Wal-Mart "Urgent Assistance" employee Ben Werkheiser, who said "We have received quite a few complaints from customers." Werkheiser stated that removal of the dolls is "more or less left up to individual stores' decisions," and when asked if the dolls had been removed from most Wal-Mart stores answered "Yes, they've pulled them because people complained about it. We are mainly responding to customers' complaints. The dolls in most of our Wal-Marts have been pulled." Fellow Wal-Mart employee Maria McDonald stated "We have had many complaints with the doll...the calls we are getting are from customers. I personally have received a lot of calls from customers."

Wal-Mart employee Werkheiser offered advice to customers: "Contact store managers and let them know what's going on. Have them listen to the doll. Customers can call the home office, 1-800-WALMART." Although the Wal-Mart corporate office declined our request to provide an official policy statement, MAMA spokesperson Lee said: "The facts speak for themselves - Wal-Mart is saying YES! to parent requests for removal of the "Islam is the light" doll from the shelves."

A TALE OF TWO TOY STORES....

On the other hand, MAMA's requests to Target to remove the doll - or attach a label stating that it says "Islam is the Light" - met with a NO!

Amy Reilly of Target's Media Relations office called Lee and directed parents "To talk to Mattel if you have any issues with the doll." Reilly carefully stated, "We have not had a national recall on those dolls." When told of parents concerns about the doll Reilly stated, "The doll is a well selling doll." She said, for anything else "I would continue to try reaching Mattel."

"The difference is clear between two responses to parents' concerns," said Lee. "Wal-Mart is trying to help parents, and leaves the decision up to their managers. It appears from all the Target cases that parents have sent us (see "Cases" at www.labelthatdoll.com), that Target refuses to take action in response to consumer complaints, and local Target store managers aren't permitted to respond to their local community."

"The question is what will Target, Wal-Mart and other retailers do on December 26, when all those parents who bought that 'well selling' doll try to return it because it says 'Islam is the light'?" Lee said.

Lee noted that individual Kmarts have also been reported in the media as removing the dolls, but no nationwide policy has been released.

It's already started...Ammunition Accountability Legislation

Remember how Obama said that he wasn't going to take your guns? Well, it seems that his minions and allies in the anti-gun world have no problem with taking your ammo! If they can deprive you of ammo they do not need to take your guns!

The bill that is being pushed in 18 states requires all ammunition to be encoded by the manufacture, providing a data base of all Ammunition sales. So they will know how much you buy and what calibers. Nobody can sell any ammunition after June 30, 2009 unless the ammunition is coded.

Any privately held uncoded ammunition must be destroyed by July 1, 2011. (Including hand loaded ammo.) They will also charge a .05 cent tax on every round so every box of ammo you buy will go up at least $2.50 or more!

This legislation is currently pending in 18 states: Alabama , Arizona , California , Connecticut , Hawaii , Illinois , Indiana , Kentucky , Maryland , Mississippi , Missouri, New Jersey, New York , Pennsylvania , Rhode Island , South Carolina, Tennessee , and Washington .

2008 Legislation
Alabama
Alabama Senate Bill 541

Arizona
Arizona House Bill 2833

California
California Senate Bill 997 (Carried Over from 2007)

Connecticut
Connecticut Senate Bill 603

Hawaii
Hawaii House Bill 2392
Hawaii Senate Bill 2020
Hawaii Senate Bill 2076
Hawaii House Resolution 82-07 (Carried Over from 2007)
Hawaii Concurrent Resolution 104-06 (Carried Over from 2007)

Illinois
Illinois House Bill 4258
Illinois House Bill 4259
Illinois House Bill 4269
Illinois House Bill 4349
Illinois Senate Bill 1095 (Carried Over from 2007)

Indiana
Indiana House Bill 1260

Kentucky
Kentucky House Bill 715

Maryland
Maryland House Bill 517

Mississippi
Mississippi Senate Bill 2286

Missouri
Missouri Senate Bill 1200

New Jersey
New Jersey Assembly Bill 2490

New York
New York Assembly Bill 10259
New York Assembly Bill 6920 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Assembly Bill 7300 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Senate Bill 1177 (Carried Over from 2007)
New York Senate Bill 3731 (Carried Over from 2007)

Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania House Bill

Rhode Island
Rhode Island Senate Bill 2742

South Carolina
South Carolina Senate Bill 1259

Tennessee
Tennessee House Bill 3245
Tennessee Senate Bill 3395

Washington
Washington House Bill 3359

2007 Legislation
California Senate Bill 997
Hawaii House Resolution 82-07
Hawaii Concurrent Resolution 104-06
Illinois Senate Bill 1095
Maryland House Bill 1393
New York House Bill 6920
New York House Bill 7300
New York Senate Bill 1177
New York Senate Bill 3731

Protecting America in the New Missile Age – Chapter Four: The Cost of Missile Defense

Robert L. Pfaltzgraff, Jr., Ph.D.

Editor’s note: This is the fourth in an 18-part series of excerpts from Protecting America in the new Missile Age – A Reader. Published by The Heritage Foundation with a number of prominent contributors, its purpose is to inform and educate all Americans about the security challenges we face in an ever-changing world.

Missile defense represents a relatively small part of the total U.S. defense budget: just over $8 billion out of a total 2008 defense budget of $700 billion. This is less than one-70th of national defense spending, and defense spending is only about 4%of gross domestic product. By reasonable standards, missile defense is a modest national security investment that pales in comparison to the consequences of a ballistic missile attack against even one U.S. city. Instead of the few thousand fatalities resulting from the 9/11 attack, we could lose hundreds of thousands and suffer vastly greater physical destruction from the detonation of a single warhead comparable to the atomic bomb dropped on Hiroshima. One need only read the obituaries published by the New York Times in the weeks following 9/11. They make somber reading for anyone in doubt of the human tragedy caused by such an attack.

Nevertheless, we are entitled to ask what we are receiving for our investment in missile defense. As other contributors to this reader have pointed out, the United States has had a missile defense research program for several decades. President Ronald Reagan, in his seminal address on March 23, 1983, challenged the scientific and technological community to produce missile defense concepts to defend against the growing Soviet missile threat. ....

Exclusive: Saudi Kingdom Continues to Export Radical Wahhabism

Jim Kouri, CPP

Wahhabism is a fundamentalist movement, named after Muhammad ibn Abd al Wahhab (1703-1792). It remains the dominant form of Islam in Saudi Arabia.
Wahhabis hold that some Muslim groups such as Shia Islam follow novel or non-Islamic practices.Wahhabi theology advocates puritanical and legalistic stances in matters of faith and religious practice. Wahhabists see their role as a movement to restore Islam from what they perceive to be innovations, superstitions, deviances, heresies and idolatries. There are many practices that they believe are contrary to Islam.

Wahhabism was a considered a small sect within Islam until the discovery of oil in Arabia, in 1938. Enormous oil revenues provided the means to spread the beliefs of Wahhabism throughout the Middle East. Saudi laypeople, government officials and clerics have donated many tens of millions of dollars to create Wahhabi-oriented religious schools, newspapers and outreach organizations.

U.S. government and other experts have reported that Islamic extremism is on the rise and that the spread of Islamic extremism is the preeminent threat facing the United States. In addition, various sources alleged that Saudi Arabia is one source that has supported and funded the spread of Islamic extremism, or Wahabbism, globally.

The intelligence agencies, the Department of Defense, the State Department, and the U.S. Agency for International Development are implementing various efforts to identify, monitor, and counter the support and funding of the global propagation of Islamic extremism. The intelligence agencies and DOD are carrying out identification and monitoring efforts, primarily in counterintelligence and force protection.

According to reports, the State Department and USAID are carrying out efforts to counter the global propagation of Islamic extremism, with State's efforts focused primarily on traditional diplomacy, counterterrorism, and public diplomacy and USAID's efforts focused on development programs to diminish underlying conditions of extremism.

According to the General Accounting Office they are preparing a classified report to be subsequently released with a more complete description of U.S. efforts to address the global spread of Islamic extremism. A number of sources have reported that Saudi private entities and individuals, as well as sources from other countries, are allegedly financing or supporting Islamic extremism.

For example, in July 2005, a Treasury official testified before Congress that Saudi Arabia-based and -funded organizations remain a key source for the promotion of ideologies used by terrorists and violent extremists around the world to justify their agenda. However, according to the 9/11 Commission Report, the Commission found no persuasive evidence that the Saudi government knowingly supported al Qaeda.

The government agencies also told GAO staff that Islamic extremism is being propagated by sources in countries other than Saudi Arabia, such as Iran, Kuwait, and Syria. The agencies are still examining Saudi Arabia's relationship, and that of other sources in other countries, to Islamic extremism.

The Saudi government has announced and, in some cases, undertaken some reform efforts to address Islamic extremism. For example, the government is undertaking educational and religious reforms, including revising textbooks and conducting a three-year enlightenment program, to purge extremism and intolerance from religious education. However, U.S. agencies do not know the extent of the Saudi government's efforts to limit the activities of Saudi sources that have allegedly propagated Islamic extremism outside of Saudi Arabia.

Sob Stories for Terrorists

When someone admits to committing a crime, the emotional angst is shared by loved ones of the victim and accused alike. Drunk drivers have families, too, after all. So do bank robbers. But you won't see many newspaper stories devoted to their torment.

It is entirely different when it comes to those accused of terror-related crimes.....

Donors list raises fears over Hillary Clinton role as Secretary of State

Bill Clinton has raised millions of dollars from governments and politicians in the Middle East and Asia, raising fresh concerns about the impartiality of his wife’s role as Secretary of State. ....

'American Taliban' Lindh Asks Bush for Freedom

The parents of American-born Taliban fighter John Walker Lindh on Wednesday pleaded with President George W. Bush to set their son free before he leaves office next month.

IMF warns of economic riots, police ready for civil unrest

Paulson discussed worst-case scenario at bailout meeting – declare martial law.