Hizballah, MAS at Israeli Embassy in Washington

from Jihad Watch

Hizballah flag at left

Mahdi Bray of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation

These photos come from the Muslim American Society-sponsored protest Friday at the Israel Embassy in Washington.

A bit of background: you can see Mahdi Bray in this video from 2000, openly expressing support for the jihad terrorist groups Hamas and Hizballah:

In 2007 Bray put this lame spin on that video:

Bray said his gestures weren’t in support of Hamas and Hezbollah.

“You saw me pumping my fists. You didn’t see me raising my hands. If they had shown the audience, you would have seen people in the audience raising their hands and falling out laughing,” he said. “For him to come and make these kinds of radical rants, no one took him seriously.”

Bray said he does not support violence, and would have been more judicious in his reaction had the event happened after Sept. 11, 2001.

And now here's a chance for Bray to issue some new disavowals!

Mahdi Bray is the Executive Director of the Muslim American Society Freedom Foundation.

In a lengthy expose of Muslim Brotherhood activity in the US, the Chicago Tribune published this in 2004: "In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members."

And what is the Muslim Brotherhood's agenda?

The Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its 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 other religions." -- "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," by Mohamed Akram, May 19, 1991.

Islamic Sharia Law for Beginners

Dave Gaubatz

There have been many outstanding articles written by counterterrorism (CT) specialists for other counterterrorism specialists. As an example, one need only read articles produced by David Yerushalmi, Director, SANE. Yerushalmi is light years ahead of others in the field of Sharia law, and thus his articles dissect Sharia in great depth and breadth. What is needed for families that want to understand the complexities of Islamic Sharia Law, however, and the impact Sharia has on our society – which includes people of all religions and all races – is an explanation they can understand at a novice level.

After gathering such information it is important, subsequently, for the novice CT individual to be able to explain it to other concerned neighbors, friends, and relatives. Therefore the following is a basic explanation designed for the novice; and it explains how the dangers of Sharia law creep into any society, including our own:

#1: An ideology/religion is formed. We can name it anything our hearts desire. We will call this one “New Religionism” (NR).

#2: The founders of NR will say they have five basic beliefs/pillars to which they all must adhere in order to be a true member/worshipper of NR.

#3: The five pillars of this new religion are:

3a: You must believe in God

3b: You must attend every NR service

3c: You must pray to the NR God eight times a day

3d: You must associate only with other NR worshippers

3e: You must pay 25% of your salary to the minister of NR

No matter how ridiculous some of the above pillars may seem to others, in America we have freedom of religion, and so we would not condemn the people who willingly want to observe a particular religion. Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, and Islam have factors in their respective religions that, although everyone may not agree on them all, the basic pillars cause no harm to others who do not wish to observe them, so all of these religions are observed in America.

However, if NR were to add to their pillars a #4 which advocates mandatory punishments - such as death - for worshippers and even non-worshippers who do not observe NR’s five basic pillars, this could cause disastrous results for NR members and non-NR members. If the NR scholars also were to advocate killing anyone who leaves the NR group, or who criticizes NR, or who insists only NR laws should be observed (rather than the laws of any country), this would be very dangerous and a grave threat to individuals and countries. If the NR scholars then encourage their members to go to war and use such tactics as suicide bombings, kidnappings, decapitating hostages, economic chaos and more, the host society as it has been known would be changed.

This is an example of what happens to a country that allows Sharia Law to be observed. Review the following equation from the list of numbers above in our hypothetical NR religion:

Numbers 1, 2, 3, 3a, 3b, 3c, 3d, and 3e = No real threat to NR members or non-members.

But if you add to the mandatory beliefs number 4 (Sharia Law) as advocated by the scholars, you then have a threat to any country’s national security and a grave threat to individuals (be they NR or non-NR worshippers).

Sharia law encompasses all aspects of a Muslim’s life. It dictates how to pray, when to pray, how to conduct business activities and how to conduct one’s everyday affairs. These are for the most part peaceful practices. The area of concern is the violent ideology that considers all non-Muslims as enemies of Islam, and the mandatory “Huddud” (Islamic criminal law) punishments such as stoning and flogging young girls. In addition, there is the aspect of Sharia that entails raising an army of Muslims always to be prepared to fight the enemy if Islam or the Muslim people are assumed to be oppressed. Under Sharia law, a Muslim must (if not capable of physically fighting) support the Mujahedeen (fighters) financially; further, they must attempt to use the pen and tongue to fight the enemy.

The majority of the basic beliefs of Islam are indeed peaceful, and the majority of Muslims do not want to observe all aspects of Sharia law. Many Muslim parents want security for their families, they want medical care, they want education, and they want to be happy. Most importantly, many Muslim parents love Islam, but want to adhere only to the peaceful aspects of Sharia law. Unfortunately for them, Sharia law is an all or nothing requirement. One can’t push aside one area and accept the others. To do so is to be an apostate of Islam. Terrorist members and their supporters believe themselves to follow “Pure Islam.” A follower of “Pure Islam”, essentially, is not required to follow any particular school of thought (currently there are four recognized Sunni schools of thought and one Shiite school of thought). “Pure Islam” worshippers believe anyone who does not follow all aspects of Sharia law is not a Muslim and he or she is also an enemy of Islam.

How should we deal with Sharia in America?

• In America we should allow any person to observe numbers 1, 2, or 3. However,
• No element of any religion in America should be authorized to fund and raise armies to be used against Americans and our country in combat (physical Jihad).
• No element of any religion should be allowed to have scholars from other countries come to our country and teach violence to the children in Islamic schools throughout America.
• No element of any religion should be allowed to purchase land in rural areas throughout America in order to have isolated communities prepare for physical Jihad against America.

The observance of Sharia law in its entirety is extremely dangerous. The Muslim people know this, their Islamic scholars know this, and people who have studied Sharia law know this. The only people who do not know or otherwise ignore this are the vast majority of our elected officials and our citizenry.

As Americans, we need to support the Muslims who do not want to observe the violent aspects of Sharia law. They need to know they will have the support of our nation’s resources to eliminate from America the violent ideological aspects of Sharia law. Muslims who want only the peaceful aspects of Sharia will tell you that America could increase its level of security by returning any foreign-born, Saudi- or Pakistani-trained Islamic scholar to his respective country. Additionally, many Muslims do advocate imprisoning such scholars. These scholars are conspiring to commit treason against America and advocate this daily to their worshippers. Of course after 9/11, they no longer stand at their podium and say this: they simply provide Jihadist manuals promoting the violence. They leave it to the individual to do what any “Pure Muslim” would do. One need only follow the Lashkar e- Taiba and al Qaeda to understand “Pure Islam.”

The photo accompanying this article shows just a sampling of material endorsing violence that our researchers have retrieved from 100 Islamic centers – from the east coast of America to the west coast – that we have visited during the last few months. The material includes discs, tapes, DVDs, books, and manuals that call for killing America’s brave young men and women serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. The materials also call for killing Jewish people throughout the world, killing Muslims who do not conform to all aspects of Sharia law and turning America into an Islamic state.

Our researchers - a team comprised of Christians, Jews and Muslims - still have over 2,000 Islamic Centers to visit and conduct first-hand research. As you can see, we have our work cut out for us.

6 out of 10 servicemen wary of Obama in charge

Survey: 'Nobody has confidence in this guy as commander in chief'

U.S. governors seek $1 trillion federal assistance

(Compiler's note: Bailout mania continues)

By Jon Hurdle

PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) - Governors of five U.S. states urged the federal government to provide $1 trillion in aid to the country's 50 states to help pay for education, welfare and infrastructure as states struggle with steep budget deficits amid a deepening recession.

The governors of New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Ohio and Wisconsin -- all Democrats -- said the initiative for the two-year aid package was backed by other governors and follows a meeting in December where governors called on President-elect Barack Obama to help them maintain services in the face of slumping revenues.

Gov. David Paterson of New York said 43 states now have budget deficits totaling some $100 billion as tax revenues plunge. ....

Terrorists use online gambling to launder money

LONDON, England -- As reported by The Daily Telegraph: "The security services have been warned that the internet is increasingly being used to train terrorists, raise money and as the main form of media to promote radical Islam.

"Computer experts in al-Qaeda have created an "online University of Jihad" that is recruiting and training potential terrorists in Britain without them having to risk travelling to camps in Pakistan.

"...Terry Prattar, a specialist in counter-terrorism with Jane's Strategic Advisory Services, said the internet had been used to raise funds for terrorists in Afghanistan including the use of on-line gambling sites to launder cash.

"...The terror groups in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan continue to use Google maps as an information resource for targeting..."

Defense firms getting into computer-network security business

By Gopal Ratnam

BOSTON — Lockheed Martin Corp. and Boeing Co. are deploying forces and resources to a new battlefield: cyberspace.

As the U.S. government increases spending for protection against computer attacks, new units of these military contractors are aiming to capture a share of a market that may reach almost $11 billion by 2013.

President George W. Bush announced a national cybersecurity plan in January 2008 to be supervised by the Department of Homeland Security, after an increasing number of attacks on U.S. government and private sector networks by groups linked to foreign governments, organized crime gangs and hackers. President-elect Barack Obama has pledged to appoint a "chief technology officer" to oversee the effort.

"The whole area of cyber is probably one of the faster-growing areas of the U.S. budget," said Linda Gooden, executive vice president of Lockheed's Information Systems & Global Services unit, which includes a cyber-defense operation launched in October. "It's something that we're very focused on. I expect there will be a significant focus under Obama."

U.S. government spending to secure military, intelligence and other agency computer networks is forecast to rise 44 percent to $10.7 billion in 2013 from $7.4 billion this year, according to a report by market forecaster Input.

The number of security breaches of U.S. and private-computer networks reported to the Computer Emergency Readiness Team of the Homeland Security Department almost doubled to 72,000 in the fiscal year ended in October from about 37,000 the previous year, agency spokeswoman Amy Kudwa said in an interview.

Boeing, which bases its Integrated Defense Systems unit in St. Louis, set up its Cyber Solutions division in August because of a realization by the company that it's a very serious threat, Barbara Fast, vice president of the unit, said. "It's not a question of if we'll be attacked but when and how will we be prepared."

The possibility that the Obama administration may devote more resources to securing the nation's networks is attracting defense contractors to compete with established providers like McAfee Inc. and Symantec Corp.

New York-based L-3 Communications Holdings Inc., and San Diego-based SAIC Inc., also have created special cybersecurity units. Their spokesmen declined to comment.

U.S. government agencies received an overall grade of C on computer security in fiscal 2007, according to a May report by the U.S. House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. The Pentagon's D-minus was an improvement over its failing grade in 2006, while the Treasury Department, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission each scored an F. The Justice Department earned an A.

Many of the government agencies also were found lacking a crisis-response plan if their networks were to suffer a series of breaches, based on the outcome of a cybersecurity game organized Dec. 17 and 18 in Washington by the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton and the non-partisan Business Executives for National Security.

In the game, players were told that university students received free portable computer drives and compact discs at a sports event. When the discs were plugged into computers, malicious software embedded on the devices spread, causing shutdowns of computer networks in the U.S. government, financial institutions, and the transportation sector.

"We need to have a plan tailored for a cyber crisis," Michael Chertoff, secretary of homeland security, said at the end of the simulated exercise.

"If the U.S. computer networks are attacked by a terrorist group or a foreign government, is this an act of war? How do we respond?" he said. "We haven't put together that strategy yet."

President-elect Obama must assert that the cyber-infrastructure of the United States is a vital asset for national security and the economy, according to a Dec. 8 report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank.

That's just what Obama said he will do.

"I'll declare our cyber-infrastructure a strategic asset, and appoint a National Cyber Adviser who will report directly to me," he said in a July address at Purdue. "We'll coordinate efforts across the federal government, implement a truly national cyber-security policy, and tighten standards to secure information."

Congress, too, will examine U.S. antitrust laws that may restrict companies from sharing information on cyber attacks in a crisis, said Rep. James Langevin, D-R.I., and chairman of the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Cybersecurity.

"It's going to be a multiyear, multibillion-dollar project to get the right cybersecurity mechanisms in place," he said.

Shadow of Iran Looms Large Over Gaza

Dr. Walid Phares

The Israeli air raids on Hamas’ infrastructure, along with troop movements around Gaza’s enclave and the shelling of Israel by the Jihadist organization, are both troubling developments in the Middle East but they are certainly neither new nor surprising. Dramatic images of bloody Palestinian civilians fleeing from attacks and pictures of Israelis rushing to the shelters while under fire will always bring chills to observers and depress the entire international community.

Sadly, it’s hardly the first time we’ve seen these images and tragically, seven years after 9/11, they seem to connect with similar bloodshed in Mosul, Kabul and Mumbai. Even if both sides in the current Gaza conflict insist that their confrontation is at the center of the world, in reality it isn’t anymore. Car bombs and missiles in Beirut, Baghdad and Islamabad are all horrifying. There is no “top horror” anymore, even in the never-ending cycle of Gaza’s turmoil. It has all become part of the so-called “War on Terror” even though the Palestinian-Israeli quarrel is a conflict all its own. Still, why is this escalation so dramatic, why did it happen, who triggered it at this particular moment – and what can we expect going forward? It’s too grandiose to claim that anyone has all the answers, but here is my take: ....

What Is In The Hamas Arsenal?

9 Muslim Passengers Removed From Jet - Reagan Intl. Airport

Officials ordered nine Muslim passengers, including three young children, off an AirTran flight headed to Orlando from Reagan National Airport yesterday afternoon after two other passengers overheard what they thought was a suspicious remark.

Members of the party, all but one of them U.S.-born citizens who were headed to a religious retreat in Florida, were subsequently cleared for travel by FBI agents who characterized the incident as a misunderstanding, an airport official said. But the passengers said AirTran refused to rebook them, and they had to pay for seats on another carrier secured with help from the FBI.

Kashif Irfan, one of the removed passengers, said the incident began about 1 p.m. after his brother, Atif, and his brother’s wife wondered aloud about the safest place to sit on an airplane.

A source close to the investigation says Sobia was overheard talking about the safest place to sit on a plane if a bomb was on board. An Airtran spokesman says what was allegedly heard by other passengers was enough to remove the entire Irfan family from the plane.

Obama faces a difficult test in the Department of Homeland Security

by Marsha Mercer

.... Created five years ago by combining 22 federal agencies, Homeland Security is a giant nobody loves, not even its 216,000 employees. The department routinely has the worst morale in the federal government -- a shame since the work is so vital.

Among its parts: the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Secret Service, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Coast Guard. Its gargantuan mission ranges from preventing terrorist attacks and responding to disasters to policing the borders and deporting illegal immigrants.

Despite the department's problems, current Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff says rushing reform is a bad idea.

"There's a presumption in my mind against any massive changes," Chertoff told reporters at a Christian Science Monitor breakfast Wednesday. "At a minimum, you ought to take a couple of years and make sure you're using existing structures as well as you can."

Obama and Napolitano face pressure to make changes immediately. But Chertoff, who gave up a lifetime appointment as a federal appeals court judge to lead Homeland Security, warned that reorganizing is a recipe for federal inaction.

"Each time you reorganize, you freeze everything. People become uncertain what their future is. All actual, substantive work becomes impeded, and then you lose time," he said.

And, time -- as the attacks in Mumbai and the report on biological and nuclear threats reminded everybody this week -- is not on our side.

"We know that our margin of safety is shrinking, not growing," said the report by the bipartisan Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism. It predicted that without U.S. government leadership, a biological or nuclear terrorist attack will occur somewhere in the world by the end of 2013.

The blue-ribbon panel, which was formed by Congress, singled out Pakistan as a potential "unwitting source of a terrorist attack on the United States."

The sobering reality, the report said, is that "the risks are growing faster than our multi-layered defenses."

This is not a news flash. But many will find the commission a more reliable source than the Bush administration, which has been criticized for "crying wolf."

So, as Obama sets his priorities, homeland security necessarily will be near or at the top. The sick economy dominates the news, but, if people aren't safe and secure in their daily lives, the queasy stock market hardly matters.

What Homeland Security lacks is credibility. Its earnest advice in 2003 that Americans stock duct tape and plastic sheeting so they could shelter in place during a terrorist attack was ridiculed, and the color-coded threat levels never really made sense. What should we do differently when the threat level is Orange that we don't do when it's Yellow?

The change the new administration could start on is restoring the people's faith in the government. Obama is likely to make high-profile appointments on specific areas of concern, such as WMD and cyber security. These czars would report directly to him, bypassing the Department of Homeland Security. Also under review is whether to remove FEMA from the department.

For what it's worth, Chertoff doesn't think much of those ideas either. What, he asks, would more czars add? And he said that having the agency that responds to disasters as part of the larger prevention effort makes sense.

The WMD commission recommended that the government do more to make information available that helps people understand the terrorist threats, what specifically they can do to help prevent them and steps they can take if an attack occurs. That could go far toward creating real Homeland Security.

Uncle Jay Explains: Dec. 22, 2008

(Compiler's note: Click on the title above for access to a real classic)

Wall Street's Final '08 Toll: $6.9 Trillion Wiped Out

AOL: Growing majority worried over Obama's eligibility

An unscientific poll being conducted by America Online reveals more and more people are having second thoughts about Barack Obama's eligibility to occupy the Oval Office.

Those who raised questions about his vague history before the election largely drew scorn from the mainstream media, which cited an online image from Obama's campaign that purportedly proved his U.S. citizenship with a Hawaiian "Certification of Live Birth."

But the latest results from the America Online poll reveal that nationwide only 41 percent of the participants now believe there is no issue to be investigated.

Fifty-three percent nationwide, and majorities in 45 states individually, say "yes" when asked if there is "any merit" to the controversy surrounding his citizenship. Even in Obama's own state, Illinois, the opinion is split 47-47 percent on the issue.

WND has reported on nearly 20 lawsuits that have been filed in various courts around the nation, including several that have reached the U.S. Supreme Court.

They all in various ways allege Obama does not meet the "natural born citizen" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, which reads, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the legal challenges have alleged Obama was not born in Hawaii, as he insists, but in Kenya. Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 200,000 others and sign up now!

Other challenges also have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. Such cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Several details of Obama's past have added twists to the question of his eligibility and citizenship, including his family's move to Indonesia when he was a child, his travel to Pakistan in the '80s when such travel was forbidden to American citizens and conflicting reports from Obama's family about his place of birth.

His campaign posted the image of a "Certification of Live Birth" online when the questions first arose, but critics have dismissed that as irrelevant, since at the time Hawaii granted such documents to parents whose children were born outside the state.

The America Online poll shows in South Dakota and Wyoming both, the opinion runs 65-40 that Obama's eligibility needs to be investigated, but those figures are topped in Mississippi, where fully two-thirds of the people believe the truths need to be revealed.

Of the more than 102,000 votes nationwide, the split is 53 percent believing there is an issue to investigate, 41 percent saying no, and six percent undecided.

Even left-leaning Washington state came in at 53-42-5 confirming there's merit to the issue, and in California it was 50-45-5. North Dakota and Texas both turned in 61 percent of the votes citing an issue to review.

The only states where majorities believed there was no issue were Connecticut (42-50-7), Vermont (44-46-10), Rhode Island (42-52-6) and New York (45-49-6). Participants from the rarified air of the District of Columbia agreed with the minority 29-68-3. However, that was down from 71 percent in D.C. who believed, only days earlier, that there was no merit.

Among the comments posted on the America Online poll site was this warning: "If Mr. Obama were to become president, yet not respect the Constitution and customs of this country, then he is not my president. Without legitimacy, his rule will be resisted, damaged and impaired. This can only cause harm to this country."

The poll linked to a commentary that said, "There is virtually no chance that the USSC actually wants to look at this case for real. The best case scenario for the plaintiffs here is that Obama was born out of the country and is somehow covering it up. But even in that case, what you'll find is that the key stipulated fact is that Obama's mother is an American citizen.

"IF he was born out of country and IF some court wants to make an issue of it, then it might just simply enable the fastest constitutional amendment in American history. There is no chance the election will be overturned over it. Again, mom was a citizen," said the commentary.

Critics, however, say that Obama's mother was too young to automatically pass citizenship to her son at his birth.

Another commenter at the poll site said, "In his oath of office, the president must swear 'to uphold and protect the Constitution of the United States.' How can Mr. Obama satisfy this requirement, yet violate the 'Natural Born' requirement?"

Said another, "All of this controversy would go away if Obama would just produce a birth certificate. He is fueling this by refusing to do so, and by fighting the issue in court. That refusal alone should make people suspicious."

On a similar note, a recent WND poll asked readers, "Are you satisfied Obama is constitutionally eligible to assume the presidency?" A full 97 percent of nearly 7,200 voters said "no."

The top three answers were:

• No, if I can't get a driver's license without an original birth certificate, how can Obama become president without one?

• No, and Americans should continue to dog him about it through his term

• No, there's a reason why he's unwilling to disclose his original birth certificate

The next hearing before the justices at the U.S. Supreme Court on the dispute is scheduled Jan. 9, when a conference will be held on a case raised by attorney Philip Berg.

"I am determined, on behalf of the 320 million citizens in the United States, to see that 'our U.S. Constitution' is followed. Specifically, in the case of Soetoro a/k/a Obama, does he meet the constitutional qualifications for president?" Berg said in a statement on his website.

"I am appalled that the main stream media continues to ignore this issue as we are headed to a 'Constitutional Crisis.' There is nothing more important than our U.S. Constitution and it must be enforced," he said.

A partial listing and status update for several of the cases surrounding Obama's eligibility to serve as president is below:

• Philip J. Berg, a Pennsylvania Democrat, demanded that the courts verify Obama's original birth certificate and other documents proving his American citizenship. Supreme Court conferences on the case and its motions are scheduled Jan. 9 and 16.
  


• Leo Donofrio of New Jersey filed a lawsuit claiming Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court but denied a full hearing.


• Cort Wrotnowski filed suit against Connecticut's secretary of state, making a similar argument to Donofrio. His case was considered in conference by the U.S. Supreme Court, but was denied a full hearing.


• Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case on which the United States Justice Foundation is working, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.


• Chicago's Andy Martin sought legal action requiring Hawaii Gov. Linda Lingle to release Obama's vital statistics record. The case was dismissed by Hawaii Circuit Court Judge Bert Ayabe.
  
  
• Lt. Col. Donald Sullivan sought a temporary restraining order to stop the Electoral College vote in North Carolina until Barack Obama's eligibility could be confirmed, alleging doubt about Obama's citizenship. His case was denied.
  
  
• In Ohio, David M. Neal sued to force the secretary of state to request documents from the Federal Elections Commission, the Democratic National Committee, the Ohio Democratic Party and Obama to show the presidential candidate was born in Hawaii. The case was denied.
  
  
• In Washington state, Steven Marquis sued the secretary of state seeking a determination on Obama's citizenship. The case was denied.
  
  
• In Georgia, Rev. Tom Terry asked the state Supreme Court to authenticate Obama's birth certificate. His request for an injuction against Georgia's secretary of state was denied by Georgia Superior Court Judge Jerry W. Baxter.


• California attorney Orly Taitz also has brought a complaint alleging Obama is not a "natural born" citizen and has written an open letter to the Supreme Court asking for the issue to be resolved.


• Pennsylvania attorney James D. Schneller is suing Pennsylvania's secretary of state, Pedro A. Cortes., to prevent transmittal of the certified electoral vote, claiming severe moral consequences and infringement upon even freedom of religion if Obama's eligibility is not established. His case is active before the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.


• In Washington state, attorney Stephen Pidgeon is representing 12 plaintiffs in a case that claims to have standing under a unique Washington statute that allows any registered voter to challenge the election of someone who, at the time of the election, was ineligible to hold the office. The suit intends to include a subpoena of Obama's Hawaii birth certificate. The case is scheduled for argument before the Washington Supreme Court on Jan. 8.

Last month, WND reported on the potential complications an ineligible president could create.

"Should Senator Obama be discovered, after he takes office, to be ineligible for the Office of President of the United States of America and, thereby, his election declared void," argues the Alan Keyes case pending in California, "Americans will suffer irreparable harm in that (a) usurper will be sitting as the President of the United States, and none of the treaties, laws, or executive orders signed by him will be valid or legal."

With such high stakes potentially at risk, WND earlier launched a letter campaign to contact Electoral College members and urge them to review the controversy.

That followed a campaign that sent more than 60,000 letters by overnight delivery to the U.S. Supreme Court when one case contesting Obama's eligibility for the Oval Office was pending.

A separate petition, already signed by more than 200,000 also is ongoing asking authorities in the election to seek proof Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution.

WND senior reporter Jerome Corsi had gone to both Kenya and Hawaii prior to the election to investigate issues surrounding Obama's birth. But his research and discoveries only raised more questions.

The biggest question was why, if a Hawaii birth certificate exists as his campaign has stated, Obama hasn't simply ordered it made available to settle the rumors

The governor's office in Hawaii said there is a valid certificate but rejected requests for access and left ambiguous its origin: Does the certificate on file with the Department of Health indicate a Hawaii birth or was it generated after the Obama family registered a Kenyan birth in Hawaii?

Gaza: Hamas gunmen hide in hospitals

Shin Bet chief briefs cabinet on day five of Gaza offensive, says terror operatives hide in hospitals, mosques. IDF: Hamas increases use of densely populated areas for launching pads ....

Obama And That Other Ponzi Scheme

President-elect's name may emerge in Norman Hsu fraud trial.

As if being linked to one high-profile criminal case weren't enough, President-elect Barack Obama's name may soon pop up in another federal prosecution, this one involving a massive Ponzi scheme (no, the other massive Ponzi scheme). In addition to the Rod Blagojevich pay-for-play probe, Obama could figure in the upcoming fraud trial of Norman Hsu, the disgraced Democratic fundraiser who was charged last year with operating a $60 million pyramid scheme.

According to investigators, Hsu, a major Hillary Clinton fundraiser, pressured investors to donate money to political candidates with whom he was aligned. In a letter last week to U.S. District Court Judge Victor Marrero, Hsu's lawyer, Martin Cohen, requested a 60-day delay in the start of Hsu's trial, scheduled to open January 12 (Cohen cited the "extraordinary level of negative publicity" generated by the recent arrest of alleged Ponzi schemer Bernard Madoff). In his December 22 letter, a copy of which you'll find by clicking on the title above, Cohen also noted that Hsu was already "notorious for his political activities" and that it was "inevitable" that his client's "connections" to Bill and Hillary Clinton "and other democratic notables--including perhaps the president-elect--will be introduced at trial."

Before becoming a key fundraiser for Hillary Clinton's presidential bid, Hsu co-hosted a 2005 California fundraiser for Obama's political action committee and introduced the Illinois Democrat to Marc Gorenberg, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist who later joined the Obama campaign's national finance committee. Prosecutors allege that Hsu directed his investors to donate money to specific candidates, and then reimbursed them in violation of federal campaign laws. Unswayed by Cohen's argument, Marrero declined to delay the trial, which will begin a week before Obama's inauguration. ....

Another One Bites The Dust: Top Hamas Thug Killed in Air Strike

* Thousands of Hamas combatants have begun infiltrating Gaza City after shedding their uniforms and are taking over civilian apartments.

Nizar Rayyan is one of the most senior Hamas leaders killed by Israel

Hamas spiritual leader forced his kids to die with him

In addition, the IAF bombed the homes of three senior Gaza terrorists.

A senior Hamas leader has been killed by an Israeli air strike on his home in the Gaza Strip, Hamas officials say.

BBC

Nizar Rayyan, the most senior Hamas figure to be killed since 2004, had urged suicide attacks against Israel.

Palestine Today says that Sheikh Rayyan knew very well that his house was a target:

Over the past two days, Israeli aircraft bombed a number of the homes of Hamas leadersin the Gaza Strip, but most of the houses were empty

While aware of that, our Sheikh Rayyan refused to come out of his house and remained firm there with a number of his children.

News of the strike came on the sixth day of Israeli strikes on Hamas targets in the Gaza Strip.

Palestinian medical sources say 391 people have been killed. Israel says it is trying to prevent militants from firing rockets into southern Israel.

Mr Rayyan is the most senior Hamas leader to be killed since the death of Abdel Aziz al-Rantissi in April 2004.

Long reach of Israel

Since its bombing campaign began last Saturday, Israel has attacked Hamas fighters and commanders.

Sites linked to Hamas have also been hit, including smuggling tunnels under the border to Egypt, government buildings and security compounds.

Hamas considered Mr Rayyan to be a political leader, but he often wore a military uniform and was close to the group’s armed wing.

Until now, political leaders have not been killed.

The BBC’s Mike Sergeant, in Jerusalem, says this may further strengthen the determination of Hamas to resist the Israeli air assault.

But it will also be seen as an indication that the Israeli military can target key members of the Hamas leadership - the people Israel says are responsible for the rockets being fired towards Israeli towns, our correspondent adds.

Four Israelis have been killed by Palestinian rockets fired into Israel since Saturday.

Humanitarian warning

On Wednesday, Mr Rayyan had promised that Hamas would hit Israel “even deeper” than it has so far.

On the Hamas-run al-Aqsa television channel, he said Hamas militants were preparing for any Israeli ground incursion, saying “we will kill the enemy and take hostages”.

At least four other people, some said to be family members, were also killed in the air raid on Mr Rayyan’s home in the Jabaliya refugee camp in the north of the Gaza Strip.

The deaths come as the main UN agency operating in Gaza, Unwra, has resumed food deliveries, but warned of a dire humanitarian situation in the territory.

Israel is refusing entry to Gaza for international journalists and has declared the area around it a “closed military zone”, leading to speculation a ground offensive into the tiny coastal strip could be imminent.

Israeli President Shimon Peres said it was not his country’s aim to return to the Gaza Strip.

“The aim is to stop terror. Our aim, if you ask me, is a positive one - to make peace,” he told the BBC.

He said it was up to Hamas to end the conflict.

“It depends upon them. Today, after all the death and all the blood, they fired 17 rockets today. What for? If they really care about their people, stop it.”

Gaza violence goes into sixth day

UN fails to make progress on Gaza

Israel rejects Gaza truce calls

Gaza rockets hit deep into Israel

Gaza aid boat ‘rammed by Israel’

Have you driven a Ford lately?

(Compiler's note: Source-- comments from a friend ... (I’m sure glad you and I are bailing out the auto industry. The attitudes of the Ford employees shown on the video at the link below sure are approaching that of workers in a communist country! Is that where we are headed?)

Just click here for the disturbing news video

PJB: The Party’s Over

(Compiler's note: Please note that the date of this article is September 19, 2008.)

By Patrick J. Buchanan

The Crash of 2008, which is now wiping out trillions of dollars of our people’s wealth, is, like the Crash of 1929, likely to mark the end of one era and the onset of another.

The new era will see a more sober and much diminished America. The “Omnipower” and “Indispensable Nation” we heard about in all the hubris and braggadocio following our Cold War victory is history.

Seizing on the crisis, the left says we are witnessing the failure of market economics, a failure of conservatism.

This is nonsense. What we are witnessing is the collapse of Gordon Gecko (”Greed Is Good!”) capitalism. What we are witnessing is what happens to a prodigal nation that ignores history, and forgets and abandons the philosophy and principles that made it great.

A true conservative cherishes prudence and believes in fiscal responsibility, balanced budgets and a self-reliant republic. He believes in saving for retirement and a rainy day, in deferred gratification, in not buying on credit what you cannot afford, in living within your means.

Is that really what got Wall Street and us into this mess — that we followed too religiously the gospel of Robert Taft and Russell Kirk?

“Government must save us!” cries the left, as ever. Yet, who got us into this mess if not the government — the Fed with its easy money, Bush with his profligate spending, and Congress and the SEC by liberating Wall Street and failing to step in and stop the drunken orgy?

For years, we Americans have spent more than we earned. We save nothing. Credit card debt, consumer debt, auto debt, mortgage debt, corporate debt — all are at record levels. And with pensions and savings being wiped out, much of that debt will never be repaid.

Our standard of living is inevitably going to fall. For foreigners will not forever buy our bonds or lend us more money if they rightly fear that they will be paid back, if at all, in cheaper dollars.

We are going to have to learn to live again without our means.

The party’s over

Up through World War II, we followed the Hamiltonian idea that America must remain economically independent of the world in order to remain politically independent.

But this generation decided that was yesterday’s bromide and we must march bravely forward into a Global Economy, where we all depend on one another. American companies morphed into “global companies” and moved plants and factories to Mexico, Asia, China and India, and we began buying more cheaply from abroad what we used to make at home: shoes, clothes, bikes, cars, radios, TVs, planes, computers.

As the trade deficits began inexorably to rise to 6 percent of GDP, we began vast borrowing from abroad to continue buying from abroad.

At home, propelled by tax cuts, war in Iraq and an explosion in social spending, surpluses vanished and deficits reappeared and began to rise. The dollar began to sink, and gold began to soar.

Yet, still, the promises of the politicians come. Barack Obama will give us national health insurance and tax cuts for all but that 2 percent of the nation that already carries 50 percent of the federal income tax load.

John McCain is going to cut taxes, expand the military, move NATO into Georgia and Ukraine, confront Russia and force Iran to stop enriching uranium or “bomb, bomb, bomb,” with Joe Lieberman as wartime consigliere.

Who are we kidding?

What we are witnessing today is how empires end.

The Last Superpower is unable to defend its borders, protect its currency, win its wars or balance its budget. Medicare and Social Security are headed for the cliff with unfunded liabilities in the tens of trillions of dollars.

What we are witnessing today is nothing less than a Katrina-like failure of government, of our political class, and of democracy itself, casting a cloud over the viability and longevity of the system.

Notice who is managing the crisis. Not our elected leaders. Nancy Pelosi says she had nothing to do with it. Congress is paralyzed and heading home. President Bush is nowhere to be seen.

Hank Paulson of Goldman Sachs and Ben Bernanke of the Fed chose to bail out Bear Sterns but let Lehman go under. They decided to nationalize Fannie and Freddie at a cost to taxpayers of hundreds of billions, putting the U.S. government behind $5 trillion in mortgages. They decided to buy AIG with $85 billion rather than see the insurance giant sink beneath the waves.

An unelected financial elite is now entrusted with the assignment of getting us out of a disaster into which an unelected financial elite plunged the nation. We are just spectators.

What the Greatest Generation handed down to us — the richest, most powerful, most self-sufficient republic in history, with the highest standard of living any nation had ever achieved — the baby boomers, oblivious and self-indulgent to the end, have frittered away.

Victor H. Krulak, 1913 - 2008 Marine general was a war hero

(Compiler's note: Our nation has just lost a great man! A must read article ... good bye my friend ... Semper Fidelis. Simply too much good material to highlight, so you're on your own.)

By Tony Perry

Retired Marine Lt. Gen. Victor H. "Brute" Krulak, celebrated for his leadership in World War II, Korea and Vietnam and for his authoritative book on the Marines, "First to Fight," died Monday at Scripps Memorial Hospital La Jolla. He was 95 and had been in declining health for several years. In a career that spanned three decades Krulak displayed bravery during combat and brilliance as a tactician and organizer of troops.

"Brute was very forgiving of young Marines who made mistakes," said retired Col. G.I. Wilson, a combat veteran. "But he was hell on senior officers who preferred careerism and bureaucracy over decisive action. He detested those who lost sight of looking after their enlisted Marines and young officers."

Born in Denver on Jan. 7, 1913, Krulak was a 1934 graduate of the Naval Academy -- where he picked up his nickname, a jest on the fact he was 5 foot 4. As a junior officer he served in Marine actions in Central America, where his views on counterinsurgency were formed.

In World War II, as a lieutenant colonel, he led a battalion in a weeklong battle as a diversionary raid to cover the invasion of Bougainville. Although wounded, he refused to be evacuated. For his bravery he was awarded the Navy Cross.

Under heavy fire from the Japanese, the Navy sent patrol boats to evacuate wounded Marines. Krulak befriended one of the young commanders, John F. Kennedy. Decades later the two shared a drink of whiskey in the Oval Office after Kennedy was elected president.

After World War II, Krulak held several key jobs, including commander of the 5th Marine Regiment and later chief of staff for the 1st Marine Division during the war in Korea. Later he served as commander of the Marine boot camp in San Diego and, from 1962 to 1964, as special assistant for counterinsurgency to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

As commanding general of Fleet Marine Force Pacific he made 54 trips to Vietnam.

His ideas about mining Haiphong Harbor and relying on small unit actions in South Vietnam to win the support of the populace clashed with the strategy of Army Gen. William C. Westmoreland, commander of all U.S. troops from 1964 to 1968. He opposed Westmoreland's decision to establish an outpost at Khe Sanh, which resulted in one of the bloodiest sieges of the war. Krulak had hoped to become Marine Corps commandant, but President Johnson in 1968 nominated Gen. Leonard Chapman Jr. Krulak retired and began a second career as an executive for Copley newspapers and as a columnist. He retired as an executive in 1977 but continued to write.

In 1984, his book "First to Fight: An Inside View of the U.S. Marine Corps" was published, examining the history and culture of the Marine Corps. It remains on the official reading list for Marines and has been said to carry the DNA of the organization that prides itself on being the worst enemy that a foe of the United States can imagine.

"The Marines are an assemblage of warriors, nothing more," Krulak wrote. He called on Marines to maintain a "religious dedication" to being ready to "go and win -- and then come back alive." He disdained Pentagon bureaucracy and, even as he celebrated the Corps' history, he called for Marines to "remain on the cutting edge of the technology that will keep its specialty effective."

Bing West, former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration and author of books on Marines in Vietnam and Iraq, said Krulak "was legendary for the depth of his intelligence."

In a 2007 speech to the Marine Corps Assn., Defense Secretary Robert Gates praised Krulak for "overcoming conventional wisdom and bureaucratic obstacles thrown in one's path." Among other things, Krulak advocated that the Marines form a special forces unit when other Marine leaders opposed the idea.

All three of Krulak's sons served in Vietnam: Charles and William as Marine infantry officers, Victor Jr. as a Navy chaplain. After retiring from the Marines, William followed his brother into the Episcopal clergy. Charles, as a general, served as Marine commandant from 1995 to 1999, and followed in his father's footsteps as an innovator and champion of the enlisted man. Along with his sons, Krulak is survived by four grandchildren and 10 great-grandchildren.

Krulak's wife, Amy, died in 2001. Funeral services are set for 2 p.m. Jan. 8 at the chapel at Marine Corps Air Station Miramar.

Americans drop dead as police get Taser-happy

By Drew Zahn

Are cops underestimating stun gun's lethal power?

Even though the news is inundated with stories of people dying after being stunned by Tasers, police departments all over the nation are adding the electric-shock weapons to their arsenals, convinced the benefits outweigh the risks.

Research by WND revealed several news stories from just this month of police departments newly equipping themselves with the electric stun guns, including law officers in Maryland, Florida, New York, Michigan and even a small community of 15,000 in Pennsylvania, where the 22 full-time officers will be receiving 12 new Tasers.

In other cities, the number of Tasers already in use is skyrocketing: Durham, N.C., plans to double its police arsenal from 110 to 235, and a Georgia police chief is hoping to add 1,000 more stun guns to the Atlanta metro.

The Taser company's website includes testimonials from dozens of police departments, from nearly every state in the U.S.; and a statement from New York's Deleware County Sheriff's Department – which armed itself with Tasers last week – claims 13,400 law enforcement, correctional and military agencies in 44 countries use the device, having fired it on a cumulative total of more than 624,000 people.

The Taser stun gun is the most common brand of a conductive energy device, or CED, which fires 50,000 volts of electricity through its target from as far as 35 feet away, causing uncontrollable muscle contraction and temporary immobilization.

For many of law enforcement agencies now using the device, the Taser is viewed as a safe alternative to guns, nightsticks or physical force in restraining uncooperative subjects.

In Johnsonburg, Pa., Police Chief Bryan Parana is proud to boast the first police department in his county to use Tasers.

"It's one of the most researched electronic devices out there. What I want to get across is it's not electrocution," Parana told the DuBois Courer-Express, "It is an electronic device which incapacitates."

The safety of the device, however, is becoming a matter of hot debate, and, as more and more news stories are beginning to reveal, it's an electric device that can also kill.

Two days after the city of San Jose, Calif., agreed to pay $70,000 to the wife and child of a man who died in 2005 after police jolted him with Tasers, the city is the center of controversy again after area law enforcement officers fired the device into 26-year-old Edwin Rodriguez.

Family members drove Rodriguez to the Valley Medical Center after he suffered an attack of his chronic schizophrenia. When he resisted treatment, however, police pinned him to the ground and stunned him with a Taser, reportedly four times.

Rodriguez died within the hour, the fifth person to have died in the city after being shocked by police since San Jose issued Tasers to officers in 2004.

According to the human rights organization, Amnesty International, deaths like Rodriquez happen too often to be freak accidents.

An Amnesty International report titled "USA: Less than lethal?" records 334 people have died after being stunned by Tasers in the U.S. between 2001 and August 2008, including 55 in California and 52 in Florida.

"Tasers are not the 'non-lethal' weapons they are portrayed to be," said Angela Wright, author of the report. "They can kill and should only be used as a last resort."

Proponents of Tasers, however, disagree that the devices pose any serious health threat. Deputy Dan Deering, a Taser trainer for Michigan's Jackson County Sheriff's Office – which began using the weapons in the fall – told the Jackson Citizen Patriot that there are "stacks and stacks" of medical documents backing the Taser's safety.

"Tasers generate a lot of volts, but not a lot of amps," Deering told the newspaper. "It's not the volts that kill you, it's the amps."

Police also testify that the weapons reduce injuries to both officers and suspects, and that even the threat of a Taser's excruciating pain is often a sufficient deterrent.

In Howard County, Md., which lies between Baltimore and Washigton, police spokeswoman Sherry Llewellyn told the Baltimore Examiner, "We've actually only had to discharge the devices about once a month because simply having the weapon displayed is enough to get suspects to comply."

Critics worry, however, that the very confidence police officers have in Tasers causes them to underestimate their potentially lethal power.

"We're seeing more fatalities following their use," American Civil Liberties Union attorney Peter Bibring told the Mercury News, "and it raises questions about whether they are as safe as the manufacturer claims."

Southern Christian Leadership Conference President Charles Steele Jr. questions the plan to equip Atlanta's police officers with the stun guns.

"What the problem has been," Steele told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, "is that people who've been given permission to use them … say, 'Oh, it's not a real weapon to a large degree, and I'm going to use this gun without thinking of the ramifications."

And while the Taser company, the Associated Press reports, maintains that the devices cannot kill, the increasing use of the stun guns – and the increasing number of deaths connected to their use – is starting to draw critics in both the courtroom and the laboratory.

In June, the San Jose Mercury News reports, a federal jury found Taser International partly responsible for the 2005 death of Robert C. Heston, whom Salinas, Calif., police jolted repeatedly during an arrest. According to California Lawyer magazine, the verdict was the company's first courtroom loss after 70 dismissals and settlements.

And while the Amnesty International report did concede that most of the 334 deaths it recorded were attributed to other medical factors such as drug intoxication, the report cited that coroners have concluded Taser shocks did indeed cause or contribute to at least 50 of the deaths.

A study done by researchers commissioned by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and reported by the Associated Press also concluded that over time, Tasers can begin to malfunction and fire with up to 50 percent more power than their manufactured limits. Further, the study found, even stun guns firing at expected electrical levels carry some risk of inducing cardiac arrest.

"Scientists who had evaluated the Taser to start with said, 'Well, there's zero probability of death.' I'm sure that's not the case," Pierre Savard, co-author of the study, told The Arizona Republic. "I'm 100 percent certain that cardiac diseases increase the risk of death after receiving Taser shock. I think there's enough scientific evidence for that."

Taser International, the AP reports, called the study flawed.

"Regardless of whether or not the anomaly (high-firing guns) is accurate," Taser Vice President Steve Tuttle said, "it has no bearing on safety."

"Independent medical and scientific experts have determined TASER devices to be a safer use-of-force option compared to traditional use-of-force tools," asserts the company's website. "Field studies have reaffirmed the life-saving value of TASER devices."

I expect a global recession and a severe one throughout 2009, says Roubini

By Aline van Duyn

The following is an edited transcript from a video interview with Nouriel Roubini, professor of economics at the Stern School of Business, New York University. His dire economic predictions have earned him the name "Dr. Doom".

Question: What's in store for 2009?

Answer: It is going to be a year of economic stagnation and recession for most of the global economy with deflationary pressures... I expect a global recession and a severe one.

Q: So you think next year will probably be the worst year?

A: Yes. I see a recession throughout 2009 ... and maybe there will be return to positive growth by 2010.

Q: What other policy actions do you think need to be taken?

---

A: Well, part of the answer is the degree of these policy actions. For example, in the US monetary policy right now is very aggressive ... I believe the ECB [European Central Bank] is behind the curve ... But also on top of everything else I think that we have to recapitalise financial institutions much faster, more aggressively in the US. We also need a plan to reduce the debt burden of households that are now distressed and bankrupt.

Q: So it is going to cost the taxpayer a lot more?

A: The fiscal deficit in the US is going to be huge; at least $1,000 billion (Dh3,673 billion) in 2010; another $1,000 billion in 2011.

Q: Is there a risk that the capitalist system doesn't recover from this shock?

A: We are going to avoid the Great Depression and a severe recession even if there is a risk of protracted slow economic growth. So I don't think this is the end of capitalism ... but it suggests that really there are significant market failures, that markets don't self-regulate each other.

Q: Are you advising the future Obama administration?

A: I am not directly advising the administration. I am, of course, in touch with a number of members in the economic team.

Q: What could be the next shoe to drop?

A: There are many of them. I think the process of deleveraging is going to continue. You could have a thousand, if not more, hedge funds going bust all at the same time.

Another source of stress is emerging market economies. There are about a dozen of them that are on the verge of a potential financial crisis: Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey, Ukraine in emerging Europe ... Pakistan, Indonesia or [South] Korea in Asia. Places like Ecuador that just defaulted. Argentina and Venezuela in Latin America. Some of these countries could get in trouble and there could be contagious effects to other financial markets in other emerging markets. This credit loss is going to spread from mortgages to commercial real estate, to credit cards, to auto loans, to leverage loans, to industrial and commercial loans ... There are many sources of financial stress.

Q: What is your outlook for the dollar?

A: There are different forces. In recent months the dollar was strengthening, partly because there was this flight to safety. Of course, also the bleak economic outlook in Japan and Europe implied the relative interest rates are becoming less bearish for the dollar, but looking ahead I see a dollar weakness. I see dollar weakness because effectively the Fed is easing money like crazy.

Q: What is the outlook for markets?

A: I see another 15 to 20 per cent downside risk for US and global equities because in the next few months macro news and earnings news is going to be much worse than expected ... I don't see this as being the bottom of the market. There is a bear market rally but, like the previous ones, it is going to fizzle out.

So I am concerned about equities, I am concerned about credit, I am concerned about commodities falling another 15-20 per cent given a severe recession. I am still concerned about emerging market asset classes. I think that cash and cash-like instruments such as safe government bonds are still the safer bet. Down the line towards the end of 2009, if we see the light at the end of the tunnel of economic recovery maybe it is time to go back into risky assets.

Russian Hackers Wreak Havoc in the West

By Tudor Vieru

Chinese hackers are not far behind

As most of the international community focuses its attention on drug traffic, cyber-crime is becoming increasingly aggressive, and the number of Internet attacks, be they through denial-of-service, spam, malicious software or viruses, is constantly going up. Hackers in Russia and China are mainly behind these attacks, considering that their level of computer knowledge is highly developed. Young students from Moscow's technical universities are approached by hackers, and join crime groups. They stand to gain between 5,000 and 7,000 dollars per month, as opposed to the average Russian’s salary of $640.

"The damage from cyber attack is real. Ineffective cybersecurity, and attacks on our informational infrastructure in an increasingly competitive international environment, undercut U.S. strength and put the nation at risk," said a report forwarded to Congress by a commission. The paper advocates the creation of a special branch at the White House, designed to protect the American cyber-space from attacks coming from other governments or individuals.

The report also cites the fact that intellectual rights infringements, caused by hackers in the last year alone amount to several billion dollars. The State Department reportedly lost thousands of gigabytes of data to hackers, as did Homeland Security, which reported that numerous files, belonging to the strategically-important Transportation Security Administration – which deals, among other things, with airport security nationwide – were also scanned and attacked repeatedly, sometimes several hundred thousand times per day.

According to international estimates, cyber-criminals have developed an underground market worth more than $100 billion yearly. In Moscow and Beijing, sleek luxury cars can be seen roaming the streets, driven by people below the age of 30. Although the evidence is there, Russian authorities say that they have very few resources available for fighting the hackers, who use rogue Internet providers to channel their attacks through.

"Why should I take a regular job after graduating and exert myself to earn just $2,000 a month, rather than grab this chance to make money? It makes sense to get as much as you can, as quickly as possible, rather than wasting time working for someone else," argues a Russian hacker, who has an anonymous account on a cyber-crime forum, specialized in credit card fraud.

Terror Threat In London Severe - Highest Level Since 9/11

Security chiefs in London are extremely concerned that Israel’s actions in Palestine will provoke a furious response by Islamic extremists based in the UK, with 4,000 active terrorists identified by a former head of the Met.

With the death toll in Gaza reaching 340 London has been put on a “high state of alert” following the violent clashes outside of the Israeli Embassy in Kensington and the worrying statistic that 4,000 terrorism suspects are active in the UK.

Lord Stevens the head of the Met disclosed the figure that up to 4,000 terrorism suspects are active in the UK, and stated that police and MI5 were “still too under funded and undermanned to cope with the task they face in the decades to come. And that’s how long this will last.”

Security chiefs in London are concerned that the escalation of violence in Gaza with the prospects of a ground offensive by the IDF could provoke a violent response by Arab and Muslim Londoners with minority elements influenced by Al-Qaeda plotting reprisal attacks in London.

MI5 have outlined the possible security threats posed by Al Qaeda:

Explosive devices

These can be delivered to their targets in vehicles, by post or by a person. Currently an explosive device within a vehicle is the most prevalent means of attack. Unlike the Provisional IRA, who also used this method, Al Qaida networks often seek to ensure that their target is hit by employing a suicide operative within the vehicle to detonate the device at the required moment.

Suicide bombers are also deployed to carry an explosive device into the vicinity of a target individual or location. On some occasions the terrorists decide, as they did in the Madrid commuter train attacks in March 2004, to detonate their devices remotely, so that they can go on to perpetrate further attacks.”

Shootings

Al Qaida have orchestrated a campaign of shootings and close quarter attacks targeted against Westerners in Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Most recently, on 6 December 2004, gunmen mounted an assault on the US consulate in the Saudi city of Jeddah, in which five of the consulate staff and four of the attackers were killed. Al Qaida claimed responsibility for this attack. In Europe, an extremist shot dead the Dutch film maker Theo van Gogh in Amsterdam in November 2004.

Kidnappings

There has been an increase in the number of kidnappings taking place, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. The kidnapping of UK citizen Kenneth Bigley in Iraq in September 2004 resulted in his murder.

Surface to air missiles

An unsuccessful missile attack was attempted on an Israeli charter plane departing from Mombasa, Kenya, in November 2002. Similar attacks have been carried out in recent months against coalition aircraft in Iraq.

Chemical, biological and radiological CBR devices

To date, no such attacks have taken place in the UK. Alternative methods of attack, such as explosive devices, are more reliable, safer and easier for terrorists to acquire or use. Nevertheless, it is possible that Al Qaida and some other associated networks may seek to use chemical, biological or radiological material against the West. Usama bin Laden has referred to such devices on several occasions. In November 2001, he said that “if America used chemical or nuclear weapons against us, then we may retort with chemical and nuclear weapons. We have the weapons as a deterrent”.

In a June 2002 article, Al Qaida spokesman Sulaiman Abu Gaith also said “it is our right to fight [the Americans] with chemical and biological weapons”.

In April 2005, Kamel Bourgass, an Algerian with known links to Al Qaida, was convicted of plotting to manufacture and spread poisons, including ricin, in the UK.

Teaching Economics

by Walter E. Williams

Many professors, mostly on the liberal side of the political spectrum, use their classrooms to proselytize students. I have taught economics for the past 40 years and challenge anyone to find even one student, among the thousands who went through my classes, who can say, "Professor Williams used his class to proselytize students." While acceptable at most universities, it is nothing less than academic dishonesty to do so. Like others I have my own values and opinions, such as those expressed in some of my nationally syndicated columns, but they never become a part of classroom discussion.

Learning how to think straight, as opposed to what values and opinions to hold, is the crucial part of education. Part of that learning is to be able to understand the distinction between subjective statements, for which there are no commonly accepted standards of proof, and positive statements for which there are. For example, the statement "Scientists cannot spit the atom" is a positive statement because if there's any disagreement, there are facts to which we can appeal to settle the disagreement. Just visit Stanford's linear accelerator and watch them do it. By contrast, the statement "Scientists should not spit the atom" is a subjective statement. There are no facts to which we can appeal to settle any disagreement. Disagreement can go on forever. A fairly good proxy for whether a statement is subjective is the presence of words such as should and ought. This lesson is closed by telling students that it is not being suggested that they purge their vocabulary of subjective terms such as should and ought because they are excellent tools to trick others into doing what you want them to do. However, in the process of tricking others, one need not trick himself.

A related lesson is dealing with terms such as better and best and worse. This lesson might be approached by my asking students which is the best system for resource allocation: capitalist, socialist or communist? After several fall for my bait, I tell them that the correct response is to tell me it's a nonsense question. It is akin to asking their physics professor: Which is the best state: a liquid, gaseous, solid or plasma state? However, if the physics professor were asked: Which is the cheapest state to nail a nail into a board? He could answer the question and probably say that it is the solid state. Going back to the question about capitalism versus socialism and communism, asking which system maximizes personal liberty and societal wealth, the answer would be capitalism, at least here on Earth.

Another pitfall to straight thinking is sometimes called the cause and effect fallacy. That fallacy is made when a person sees event B coming on the heels of event A and then says A caused B. There may no causal relationship at all. Such is the case when the rooster crows and shortly thereafter the sun rises. That is easy to see but many historians assert that the 1929 stock market crash caused the 1930s Great Depression. Little is further from the truth. Instead, it was caused by inept fiscal, monetary and regulatory policies of the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations.

There are a number of other pitfalls to straight thinking that I lecture on as introductory material before we begin to explore economic theory. I tell students that if they hear me say something subjective, without my having prefaced it with "in my opinion," they are to raise their hand and tell me that they took my class to learn economics and not to be indoctrinated with my values. Personally, I want students to share my values that personal liberty, along with free markets, is morally superior to other forms of human organization. The most effective means to accomplish that goal is to give them the tools to be tough, rigorous, hard-minded thinkers and they will probably reach the same conclusions as I have.