SIBEL EDMONDS: In Congress We Trust...Not

(Compiler's note: A long and complex, but interesting must read article.)

by Sibel Edmonds

I have been known to quote long-dead men in my past writings. Whether eloquently expressed thoughts by our founding fathers, or those artfully expressed by ancient Greek thinkers, these quotes have always done a better job starting or ending my thoughts - that tend to be expressed in long winding sentences. For this piece I am going to break with tradition and start with an appropriate quote from a living current senator, John Kerry: "It's a sad day when you have members of Congress who are literally criminals go undisciplined by their colleagues. No wonder people look at Washington and know this city is broken."

The people do indeed look at Washington and know that this city is 'badly' broken, Senator Kerry. The public confidence in our Congress has been declining drastically. Recent poll results highlight how the American people's trust in their Congress has hit rock bottom. A survey of progressive blogs easily confirms the rage rightfully directed at our Congress for abdicating its role of oversight and accountability. Activists scream about promised hearings that never took place - without explanation. They express outrage when investigations are dropped without any justification. And they genuinely wonder out loud why, especially after they helped secure a major victory for the Democrats. The same Democrats who had for years pointed fingers at their big bad Republican majority colleagues as the main impediment preventing them from fulfilling what was expected of them.

The recent stunning but not unexpected revelations regarding Jane Harman (D-CA) by the Congressional Quarterly provide us with a little glimpse into one of the main reasons behind the steady decline in the integrity of Congress. But the story is almost dead - ready to bite the dust, thanks to our mainstream media's insistence on burying 'real' issues or stories that delve deep into the causes of our nation's continuous downward slide. In this particular case, the 'thank you' should also be extended to certain blogosphere propagandists who, blinded by their partisanship, myopic in their assessments, and ignorant in their knowledge of the inner workings of our late Congress and intelligence agencies, helped in the post-burial cremation of this case.

Ironically but understandably, the Harman case has become one of rare unequivocal bipartisanship, when no one from either side of the partisan aisle utters a word. How many House or Senate Republicans have you heard screaming, or even better, calling for an investigation? The right wing remains silent. Some may have their hand, directly or indirectly, in the same AIPAC cookie jar. Others may still feel the heavy baggage of their own party's tainted colleagues; after all, they have had their share of Abramoffs, Hasterts and the like, silently lurking in the background, albeit dimmer every day. Some on the left, after an initial silence that easily could have been mistaken for shock, are jumping from one foot to the other, like a cat on a hot tin roof, making one excuse after another; playing the 'victims of Executive Branch eavesdropping' card, the same very 'evil doing' they happened to support vehemently. Some have been dialing their trusted guardian angels within the mainstream media and certain fairly visible alternative outlets. They need no longer worry, since these guardian angels seem to have blacked out the story, and have done so without the apparent need for much arm twisting...

Hastert Redux

I am going to rewind and take you back to September 2005, when Vanity Fair published an article, which, in addition to my case and the plight of National Security Whistleblowers, exposed the dark side of the then Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert (R-IL), and the corroborated allegations of his illegal activities involving foreign agents and interests.

Vanity Fair printed the story only after they made certain they were on sure footing in the face of any possible libel by lining up more than five credible sources, and after triple pit-bull style fact-checking. They were vindicated; Hastert did not dare go after them, nor did he ever issue any true denial. Moreover, further vindication occurred only a month ago. On April 10, 2009, The Hill reported that the Former Speaker of the House was contracted to lobby for Turkey. The Justice Department record on this deal indicates that Hastert will now be "principally involved" on a $35,000-a-month contract providing representation for Turkish interests. That seems to be the current arrangement for those serving foreign interests while on the job in Congress --- to be paid at a later date, collecting on their IOU's when they secure their positions with 'the foreign lobby.'

In a recent article for American Conservative Magazine, Philip Giraldi, former CIA officer stationed in Turkey, made the following point: "Edmonds's claims have never been pursued, presumably because there are so many skeletons in both parties' closets. She has been served with a state-secrets gag order to make sure that what she knows is never revealed, a restriction that the new regime in Washington has not lifted."

And then, he hits the nail on its head: "In Hastert's case, it certainly should be a matter of public concern that a senior elected representative who may have received money from a foreign country is now officially lobbying on its behalf. How many other congressmen might have similar relationships with foreign countries and lobbying groups, providing them with golden parachutes for their retirement?"

Congress went mum on my case after the Vanity Fair story, with, of course, the mainstream media making it very easy for them. They turned bipartisan in not pursuing the case, with the same zeal as they have, so far, not pursued the Harman case. Similarly, the mainstream media is happily letting it all disappear.

I was not aware that during the publication of the Hastert story in Vanity Fair, Jane Harman's AIPAC case was already brewing in the background. Moreover, one of the very few people in Congress who was notified about Harman was none other than Hastert --- the man himself. The same Hastert, who in addition to being one of several high-ranking officials targeted by FBI counterintelligence and counterespionage investigations, was also known to be directly involved in several other high profile scandals: from his intimate involvement in the Abramoff scandal, to the Rep. William Jefferson scandal; from his 'Land Deal' scandal - where he cashed in millions off his position while "serving", to the 2006 House Page scandal.

All for One, One for All?

How does it work? How do these people escape the consequences of accountability? Are we talking about the possible use of blackmail by the Executive Branch against Congressional representatives, as if the days of J. Edgar Hoover were never over? Cases such as NSA illegal eavesdropping come to mind, when Congressional members were briefed long before it became public, yet none took any action or even uttered a word; members of both parties. Or is it more likely to be a case of secondhand blackmail, where members of Congress watch out for each other? Or, is it a combination of the above? Regardless, we see this 'all for one, one for all' kind of solidarity in Congress when it comes to criminal conduct and scandals such as those of Hastert and Harman.

Although at an initial glance, based on the wiretapping angle, the Harman case may appear to involve blackmailing --- or a milder version, exploitation of Congress by the Executive Branch --- deeper analysis would suggest even further implications, where Congressional members themselves use the incriminating information against each other to prevent pursuit or investigation of cases that they may be directly or indirectly involved in. Let me give you an example based on the Hastert case mentioned earlier:

In 2004 and 2005 I had several meetings with Rep. Henry Waxman's (D-CA) investigative and legal staff. Two of these meetings took place inside a high-security SCIF, where details and classified information pertaining to my case and those involved could be discussed.

I was told, and at the time I believed it to be the case, that the Republican majority was preventing further action - such as holding a public hearing on my whistleblower revelations. Once the Democrats took over in 2006, that barrier was removed, or so I thought.

In March 2007, I was contacted by one of Rep. Waxman's staff people who felt responsible and conscientious enough to at least let me know that there would never be a hearing into my case by their office, or for that matter, any Democratic office in the House. Based on his/her account, in February 2007 Waxman's office was preparing the necessary ingredients for their promised hearing, but in mid-March the Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, called Waxman into a meeting on the case, and after Waxman came out of that twenty-minute meeting, he told his staff 'we are no longer involved in Edmonds' case.' And so they became 'uninvolved.'

What was discussed during that meeting? The facts regarding the FBI's pursuit of Hastert, and certain other representatives, were bound to come out in any Congressional hearing into my case. Now we know that Hastert and Pelosi were both informed of Harman's role in a related case involving counterespionage investigation of AIPAC. Is it possible that Pelosi asked Waxman to lay off my case in order to protect a few of their own in an equally scandalous case? Was there a deal made between the Democratic and Republican leaders in the House to keep this and other related scandals hushed? Will we ever know the answer to these questions? Most likely not, considering the current state of our mainstream media.

And the victims remain the same: The American people who have entrusted their Congress with the role of ensuring oversight and accountability.

This kind of infestation touches everyone in Congress; one need not have a skeleton of his own to get sucked into the swamp of those infested. Does Waxman have to be a sinner to take part in the sin committed by the Hasterts and Harmans of Congress? Certainly not. On the other hand, he and others like him will abide by the un-pledged oath of 'solidarity with your party members' and 'loyalty to your dear colleagues.'

Rotten at its Core

Back to the enablers: How can we explain the continued blackout by the mainstream media, and/or, the logic-free defenses of the Harmans and Hasterts alike by the apologist spinners --- some of whom pass as the 'alternative' media? Some are committing what they rightfully accused the previous administration and their pawns of doing: cherry picking the facts, then, spin, spin, and spin until the real issue becomes blurry and unrecognizable. The conspiracy angle aimed at the timing; Porter Goss' possible beef with Jane Harman; accusing the truth divulgers, CQ sources, of being 'conspirators' with ulterior motives; portraying Harman as an outspoken vigilante on torture. And if those sound too lame to swallow, they throw in a few evil names from the foggy past of Dusty the Foggo man! If the issue and its implications weren't so serious, these spins of reality would certainly make a Pulitzer-worthy satire.

Let's take the issue of timing. First of all, the story was reported, albeit not comprehensively, by TIME magazine years ago. It took a tenacious journalist, more importantly a journalist that could have been trusted by the Intel sources to give it real coverage. It is also possible that the sources who leaked in the Harman case got fed up and disillusioned by the absence of a real investigation and decided to 'really' talk. After all, the AIPAC espionage case was dropped by the Justice Department's prosecutors within two weeks of the Harman revelations.

Same could be said about the Hastert story. At the time, many asked why the story was not told during the earlier stages of my case. It took three years for me and other FBI and DOJ sources to exhaust all channels; Congressional inquiry, IG investigation, and the courts. Those who initially were not willing to come forward and corroborate the details opened up to the Vanity Fair journalist, David Rose, in 2005.

We all can picture one of the President's men in the White House pulling an opposing Congressional member aside and whispering 'if I were you, Congressman, I'd stop pushing. I understand, as we speak, my Justice Department is looking into certain activities you've been engaged in.'

Now let's look at the 'blackmail' and 'Goss Plot' angles. Of course the 'blackmail' scenario is possible; in fact, highly possible. We all can picture one of the President's men in the White House pulling an opposing Congressional member aside and whispering 'if I were you, Congressman, I'd stop pushing. I understand, as we speak, my Justice Department is looking into certain activities you've been engaged in.'

We all can imagine, easily, a high-ranking Justice Department official having a 'discreet' meeting with a member of Congress who's been pushing for a certain investigation of certain department officials for criminal deeds, and saying, 'dear Congresswoman, we are aware of your role in a certain scandal, and are still pondering whether we should turn this into a direct investigation of you and appoint a special prosecutor…'

But, let's not forget, the misuse of incriminating information, for the purpose of blackmail, does not turn the practitioner of the wrongful deed into a victim, nor does it make the wrongful criminal deed less wrong. Instead of spinning the story, taking away attention from the facts in hand, and making Harman a victim, we must focus on this case, on Harman, as an example of a very serious disease that has infected our Congress for far too long. Those who have been entrusted with the oversight and accountability of our government cannot do so if they are vulnerable to such blackmail from the very same people they are overseeing…Period.

Those who have been elected to represent the people and their interests cannot pursue their own greed and ambitions by engaging in criminal or unethical activities against the interests of the same people they've sworn to represent, and then be given a pass.

As for far-reaching ties such as Harman's stand on torture, or a specific beef with former CIA Director Porter Goss, or wild shots from the hip in bringing up mafia-like characters such as Dusty Foggo; please don't make us laugh! Are we talking about the same Hawkish Pro-Secrecy Jane Harman here?! Harman's staunch support of NSA Wiretapping of Americans, the FISA Amendment of 2008, the Patriot ACT, the War on Iraq, and many other activities on the Civil Liberties' No-No list, is widely recognized by almost everyone, apparently, but the authors of the recent apologist spin.

And, let's not forget to add her own long-term cozy relationship with AIPAC, and the large donations she's received from various other AIPAC-related pro-Israeli PACs. To these certain 'wannabe' journalists, driven by far from pure agenda(s), shame on you; as for honor-worthy vigilant activists out there: watch out for these impostors with their newly gained popularity among those tainted in Washington, and take a hard look at whose agendas they are serving as a mouthpiece for.

Despite a certain degree of exposure, cases such as Harman's and Hastert's, involving corruption of public officials, seem to meet the same dead-end. Criminal conduct, by powerful foreign entities, against our national interest, is given a pass, as was recently proven by the abandonment of the AIPAC spy case. The absence of real investigative journalism and the pattern of blackout by our mainstream media seem now to have been almost universally accepted as a fact of life.

Pursuit of cases such as mine, via cosmetically available channels, has been, and continues to be proven futile for whistleblowers.

Therefore, you may want to ask, why in the world am I writing this piece? Because more and more people --- although not nearly enough --- are coming to the realization that our system is rotten at it's core; that in many cases we have been trying to deal with the symptoms rather than the cause.

I, like many others, believed that changing the Congressional majority in 2006 was going to bring about some of the needed changes; the pursuit of accountability being one. We were proven wrong. In 2008, many genuinely bought in to the promise of change, and thus far, they've been let down.

These experiences are disheartening, surely, but they are also eye-opening. I do see many vigilant activists who continue the fight. As long as that's the case, there is hope. More people realize that real change will require not replacing one or two or three, but many more. More people are coming to understand that the road to achieving government of the people passes through a Congress, but not the one currently occupied by the many crusty charlatans who represent only self-interest --- achieved by representing the interests of the few, rather than the majority of the people of this nation. And so I write.

Here I go again, rather than ending this in a long paragraph or two, I will let another long-gone man do it shortly and effectively: "If we have Senators and Congressmen there that can't protect themselves against the evil temptations of lobbyists, we don't need to change our lobbies, we need to change our representatives." - Will Rogers

==

Sibel Edmonds is a former FBI translator and noted whistleblower who has been under a years-long "gag order", prohibiting her from discussing many details of her allegations of corruption and espionage gleaned during her time at the FBI, due to the continuing "States Secrets privilege" assertions by the Executive Branch. Her own story has been partially documented over the last several years in several different media outlets, including a lead story on CBS' 60 Minutes, a detailed feature in Vanity Fair and, over the years, in a number of exclusive articles here at The BRAD BLOG. She is the Founder and President of the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition.

Some Muslims rethink close ties to law enforcement

.... The coalition is upset over what it says is increasing government surveillance in mosques, new Justice Department guidelines that the groups say encourage profiling, and the FBI's recent suspension of ties with the nation's largest Muslim civil rights group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations. ....

San Fran bedbug epidemic - links to illegal immigrants hidden

by C.W. Nevius

When she and her husband moved into an upscale apartment in an "emerging" neighborhood near Civic Center, Katie Beckheyer may have had some concerns about crime, gritty streets and panhandlers. But she never expected what would be the real nightmare.

Bedbugs.

"I am covered in itchy red welts," she said in an e-mail, "and drained to the core from six months of insomnia, paranoia (I wake up every morning at 3 a.m., searching my sheets for signs of them feeding on me) and incessant itching."

Beckheyer had their apartment sprayed six times. But they were still getting bitten, so they finally paid for one last treatment to make sure their belongings were clean, and then moved out.

Before you extend sympathetic wishes to the poor folks who are infested with bedbugs, here's a piece of advice - better check your mattress.

Like the rest of the country, San Francisco is experiencing a bedbug boom. Dr. Johnson Ojo of the Department of Public Health said bedbugs are popping up everywhere, from "low-income housing to high-priced hotels."

It's an all-out war on the tiny, creepy, blood-sucking predators. And the bugs are winning.

Ojo has put together a citywide policy that covers all the basic steps: Hotel managers who learn of an infestation must immediately set up a pest-control spraying, and residents are encouraged to follow specific instruction on washing clothing and showering with hot water.

Yet many who deal with the problem regularly think that current methods are no more than stopgap measures. Faced with a growing epidemic, the city needs to start thinking beyond the idea of squirting insect spray and hoping for the best.

"I feel like there has not been enough research on alternative methods," said Jeff Buckley, director of the Central City Single Room Occupancy Collaborative, which works with 5,000 to 7,000 people each year who live in supportive housing. "I know for a fact that one hotel (in the Tenderloin) has had 14 sprays in the last two months."

That's not necessarily because the hotel is doing a poor job of attacking the pests. Bedbugs are everywhere, particularly in supportive housing. But it is an example of the scale of the problem and how hard it is to solve. Consider, each of those 14 treatments is actually three consecutive sprayings per room, two weeks apart.

And the bedbugs keep coming back.

"In terms of nonroutine maintenance, bedbugs are at the top of our list," said Richard Heasley, executive director of Conard House, which provides supportive housing in 525 units for clients with chronic mental illness. "It is the single most frustrating problem we have to deal with."

If you thought bedbugs were eradicated long ago, you are not alone. Arthur Slater, an entomologist who directed UC Berkeley's pest management program from 1973 to 2001, said he hardly gave bedbugs a thought.

"When I started in '73, bedbugs were something your father might know about," he said.

Slater said there are two major factors in the bedbug upsurge over the past 10 to 15 years. The first is cheaper air fares, which allow regular travel from countries where bedbugs had never been controlled. The second factor is complacency.

"We are not prepared to put out the resources to do it well," he said.

Slater, who is now a pest-control consultant and freelance bedbug expert, is among those who think there are better treatments than spraying insecticides. He is an advocate of a treatment where large heaters are brought into a sealed room and the temperature is raised to more than 120 degrees for 24 hours. That not only kills the bedbugs but also their eggs, which are the real problem in the bugs' rapid growth.

Ojo is willing to consider heat treatment for the city, but he points out that it is expensive and requires technical expertise.

"It is promising," he said. "But it has never been tried on a large-scale basis."

Well, this might be a good time to give it a try. San Francisco has been ahead of the curve on the bedbug issue, but so far that's only meant that the city realizes what a difficult and pervasive problem it has become.

Buckley wonders if the city couldn't persuade a researcher at one of the Bay Area's medical facilities to do some work on alternative methods. Besides heat treatment, Slater said, there have been some promising results from the use of concentrated orange oil.

All worthwhile ideas.

But until they can be given a try? "I'm still checking my mattress," Buckley said.

China military build-up seems U.S.-focused: Mullen

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - China's build-up of sea and air military power funded by a strong economy appears aimed at the United States, the chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff said on Monday.

Admiral Michael Mullen said China had the right to meet its security needs, but the build-up would require the United States to work with its Pacific allies to respond to increasing Chinese military capabilities.

"They are developing capabilities that are very maritime focused, maritime and air focused, and in many ways, very much focused on us," he told a conference of the Navy League, a nonprofit seamen's support group, in Washington.

"They seem very focused on the United States Navy and our bases that are in that part of the world."

China in March unveiled its official military budget for 2009 of $70.24 billion, the latest in nearly two decades of double-digit rises in declared defense spending.

Beijing bristles at criticism, saying its spending is line with economic growth and defense needs, and its budget remains a fraction of the Pentagon's.

Mullen acknowledged that "every country in the world has got a right to develop their military as they see fit to provide for their own security."

But he said the build-up propelled by fast economic growth required the United States and allies or partners like South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand to work together to "figure out a way to work with (China)" to avoid miscalculations.

Mullen's comments followed remarks by President Barack Obama's top adviser on Asia on Friday calling for high-level talks with the Chinese military to reduce mistrust.

A brief naval clash in March in waters near China underscored that "the absence of a sound relationship between our two militaries is a part of that strategic mistrust," said Jeffrey Bader, senior director for Asian affairs at the National Security Council.

In that encounter, the U.S. Defense Department said an unarmed U.S. Navy surveillance ship was shadowed and harassed by Chinese ships.

(Reporting by Karen Jacobs, writing by Paul Eckert, editing by Alan Elsner)

General Commander of Iranian Army: "I do not think we will need more than 11 days to wipe Israel out of existence"

by Robert Spencer

"According to the shari'a and the law, it is forbidden to obtain a nuclear bomb." Other Islamic authorities differ. sharia

More on this story from MEMRI (thanks to Clark): "General Commander of the Iranian Army Ataollah Salehi: It Will Take Us 11 Days 'to Wipe Israel Out of Existence," May 3:

Following are excerpts of statements by Iranian military commanders, from a TV report which aired on LBC TV on May 3, 2009.

Over voice: Nothing can prevent Iranian missiles from targeting the heart of Israel, if Iran is subjected to a military strike by Israel. This was the response of the Iranian military commanders to the Israeli statements about a possible military strike against Iran, because of its insistence on obtaining nuclear energy. Yet an [Israeli] attack seems improbable to the Iranians, because Tel Aviv does not have the ability to go through a war with Tehran.

Iranian Chief-of-Staff General Hassan Firouzabadi: We are fully prepared to confront any attack that would threaten the interests of Iran. We have sufficient means and the necessary force to defend our territory.

General Ataollah Salehi, general commander of the Iranian army: The truth is that Israel does not have the courage to attack us. If we are subjected to any attack by Israel, I do not think we will need more than 11 days to wipe Israel out of existence.

Over voice: Tehran denies that its military preparations are aimed at attacking any neighboring country. Iran justifies its military preparedness as a means to defend Iran and the region, which may alleviate the fears and concerns of countries in the region. [...]

Over voice: But fears about Iran's missiles remain, especially among Western countries, concerned that Iran might arm its missiles with nuclear warheads, since the superpowers doubt that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful. This is categorically denied by Tehran, which says that according to the shari'a and the law, it is forbidden to obtain a nuclear bomb.

Danger Room What’s Next in National Security Thermobaric Slaughter in Sri Lanka?

By David Hambling

Media War, T is for Terror, Terrorists, Guerillas, Pirates

Both sides in a bloody conflict in Sri Lanka are alleging the use of a type of enhanced explosives, known as thermobaric weapons.

Government forces are well into the decisive final phase of operations against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam (LTTE). Six thousand civilians have been killed in fighting over the last three months.

On Monday the LTTE,a Tamil group fighting for independence, announced a unilateral ceasefire, apparently to allow civilians to escape from the “no-fire zone,” a coastal strip of about four square miles.

Reports of mass casulaties and gruesome injuries over the past few months is part of what sparked reports about the use of thermobaric weapons, which produce a prolonged pressure pulse that is far more destructive and lethal than standard explosives. There has been considerable concern about terrorists gaining thermobaric weapons such as the Russian RPO-A Schmel, because they can counter standard protection, such as armored vehicles (unless completely sealed) and body armor (which may amplify the blast effect). And the internal injuries caused by thermobaric weapons are difficult for battlefield medicine to treat.

How realistic are the allegations that the LTTE have employed thermobarics? The FBI calls the LTTE “among the most dangerous and deadly extremist outfit in the world,” and they have been accused of many attacks on civilians. They invented the suicide belt, and their Black Tiger suicide units have carried out more suicide bombings than Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda put together. (Incidentally, the LTTE are largely Hindu and have been accused of carrying out anti-Muslim campaigns.)

The Sri Lankan media, which is by no means impartial, have accused the LTTE of using thermobaric weapons for some years. The LTTE allegedly used thermobaric rockets in a 2005 attack that killed thirteen sailors, leaving bodies burned beyond recognition; a police investigator is quoted as saying : “We have asked the Government Analyst to carry out a special investigation into the matter as this type of weapon are banned all over the world.”

Recently the Sri Lankan Foreign Secretary Palitha Kohona said the government had found evidence that the LTTE were seeking to buy thermobaric weapons (as well as anti-aircraft missiles) on the international market. The government also claimed to have found an arms cache that included “”nine mortar launchers of five different caliber of 120 mm, 81 mm, 82 mm, 80 mm and 60 mm, six Multi Purpose Machine Guns (MPMG ), two thermobaric launchers, twenty pistols, three Rocket Propeller Guns (RPG), [and] seven claymore mines.”

It’s impossible to verify these claims, however.

On the other hand, there are also claims that the Sri Lankan government forces are using thermobaric weapons; they reportedly have acquired Russian RPO-A rockets in 2001 via a British company, Gladstone Industrial Holdings. The Sri Lankan army also appears to have been using heavy weapons in areas crowded with civilians, though government officials have denied it.

In an article in the Indian English-language newspaper The Statesman, M G Devasahayam last week described what he calls a humanitarian tragedy of horrendous proportions:

According to reports, not denied by the Sri Lanka government, a thermobaric bomb — a device that uses a fuel-air explosive capable of creating over-pressures equal to an atomic bomb — has been used in this mass killing. In one such attack over 520 men died and the Sri Lanka defence website displayed the photos as if these were trophies won.

The Sri Lanka defense website does indeed have an impressive gallery of “achievements” photographs from recent operations (as well as “LTTE Atrocities” and “Commander in Chief: official Events”) , with a section on the capture of the last LTTE stronghold at Puthukkudiyirippu. The pictures show bodies with no obvious external injuries, which might be a sign of death from thermobaric blast. But there also may be other explanations.

At least one petition to the UN has been raised over the Sri Lankan government’s use of thermobarics. I think we can guess how effective that is likely to be.

And, thermobaric or not, the slaughter of civilians in Sri Lanka continues.

Photo: Sri Lanka Ministry of Defence

Pakistan Implodes

(Compiler's note: Must read.)

by Alan Caruba

The wars going on in the Middle East will soon be the entire world’s next war as the fanatic Islamists throughout the region threaten to take over Pakistan and Afghanistan while continuing to wage war in Iraq. If they’re successful, India will be dragged into the full scale battle against the Taliban and al Qaeda. Where it spreads from there is anyone’s guess.

It is a battle between the 7th century of Islam and the 21st century of the rest of the world. It is a battle between men who believe that Allah demands it and they are prepared to spend as much time as necessary to achieve victory.

It is a battle in which the United States has been an unwilling participant for a very long time. The Jihadists drew blood in Beirut, Lebanon during the Reagan years in the ‘80s and again when they blew up two U.S. embassies in Africa during the Clinton years. Tellingly, it included an abortive effort to destroy the Twin Towers in 1993.

After September 11, 2001, Americans applauded the vigorous response of the Bush administration in Afghanistan, but in point of fact al Qaeda’s Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahirieasily moved across the border into Pakistan and intelligence services believe they have been there ever since.

This enemy senses serious weakness in the new President. Obama has chosen Afghanistan, the worst place to fight a war, as his new “front” while at the same time announcing he is withdrawing U.S. troops from Iraq. The increase of bombings in Iraq is no accident. It is an al Qaeda calling card. The worst of the news is the potential collapse of Pakistan as Taliban factions acquire more and more territory in what has always been a very poor excuse for a nation.

As Pakistan’s leading English-language newspaper, Dawn, recently said in an editorial, “…the Taliban are no longer a threat, but a grotesque reality,” noting that “The writ of the government weakens by the hour, while the terrorists are steadily emboldened. Yet the state and its institutions – including the military – have so far shown an appalling lack of commitment or wherewithal to force back the swarm.”

This is a newspaper in a Muslim nation, written by Muslims, who call the Taliban “grotesque.” And they should know! The editorial warned that, “The time in which to turn back the tide is fast running out.”

One of the most brilliant analysts of Middle Eastern affairs is Walid Phares, the Director of the Future Terrorism Project at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. “As the U.S. administration and its allies are devising a new strategy for the next steps in Afghanistan, the Jihadists have already begun their next move – but this time it’s inside Pakistan.”

“If Washington and its allies fail to see the big picture in the fight against the Taliban and al Qaeda,” wrote Phares, “which unfortunately may be the case now, the rapidly deteriorating situation will soon exceed the northwestern provinces of Pakistan to spill over to both Afghanistan and India.”

Simply put, you cannot negotiate with the Taliban or al Qaeda. Their promises mean nothing because they operate under taqiyya, an Arab/Muslim term that terrorism expert, Douglas Farah tells us is “embraced by radical Islamists. It blesses the concept of disguising one’s beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies from the enemy and the infidel.”

“In practical terms,” says Farah, “it is manifested as dissimulation, lying, deceiving, vexing and confounding with the intention of deflecting attention, foiling or pre-emptive blocking.”

In an excellent Policy Analysis published by the Cato Institute on April 13th, Malou Innocent shared her observations after having recently returned from a fact-finding trip to Pakistan.

Just how bad is the situation there? All of the seven tribal agencies administered by the Pakistan government are either under the de facto control or threatened by the Taliban movement. A recent truce between the government and the Taliban is of no real substance and should not be treated as such. As Ms. Innocent notes, “the military agreed not to launch operations without consulting tribal elders…(but) the army is more inclined to fight India, not a civil war within its borders.”

That is extremely bad news, but Pakistan has been a nation of extremes since it came into being after breaking away from the newly independent India in 1947 to become an Islamic state. The army – currently some 600,000 soldiers – has been the only stable element and has provided a number of presidents or rulers via coups.

Elements within the government such as its intelligence service have leaned favorably toward the Taliban and al Qaeda. Even so, “U.S. officials acknowledge, however, that the Pakistani government has captured more terrorists and committed more troops than almost any other nation in the ‘war on terror’.”

In its urban, modern cities and areas, there appears to be a genuine desire for real democracy, but the Taliban threatens to drag Pakistan back to the 7th century in its quest for a new caliphate. While the nation has remained focused on war with India since its founding, the real threat has always been the growth of fundamentalist Islam and it now poses the potential overthrow of the government.

Should that government fail, you will watch India go to full battle-ready status. Afghanistan’s government will likely fail despite the presence of U.S./NATO forces and the momentum to continue the jihad into all the nations of the region would pose a grave threat to the West. It could only be solved only by combat.

And the question everyone is wondering, if not asking, is whether Barack Obama will make the tough decisions necessary to keep Pakistan from falling to the Taliban or is willing, as George W. Bush was, to drive out a tyrannical regime?

Iran threatens Israel with "destruction in 11 days"

(Compiler's note: Must read.)

by Robert Spencer

A strange and ominous report from a German publication.

Here is my rough translation of "'Zerstörung in elf Tagen': Iran bedroht Israel," by Ulrich W. Sahm in n-tv.de, May 3 (thanks to The Total Collapse):

Iran has for the first time announced the destruction of Israel with a concrete goal. Israeli television showed an interview with the Iranian chief of staff General Attalah Salihi. He announced the "destruction of Israel within eleven days."

The Arabia expert Oded Granot explained: "Never have we heard so clear and open an announcement from Iran." President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has again and again announced the destruction of Israel in a general manner and as a political goal, but never so concretely and with a date, as did Salihi. Granot has not discovered why the destruction of Israel should happen in eleven days.... sharia

Corrections to my translation welcome.

Public Confidence in Free Fall over Administration’s Approach to Terrorist Threat

by The Editors with Family Security Matters

The American people are growing increasingly concerned about the Administration’s strategy – or lack thereof – when it comes to confronting and defeating the terrorist threat. According to a recent Rasmussen poll, only 42% of Americans believe we are winning the war on terrorism. That’s a 20 point drop since February – a huge decline in confidence as the Administration begins its second 100 days.

Why are Americans having such misgivings about the Administration’s approach to the threat of radical Jihadists? A new web video highlights some of the reasons – reasons underscored in a NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll released last week. The poll showed that a majority of Americans oppose the Administration’s political decision to selectively release memos detailing advanced interrogation techniques used on terrorists and oppose the President’s plan to close a terrorist detention facility with no plan for what to do with the terrorists housed there.

On Day 101 of the Administration, the President and Congress are being called upon to make a commitment to an overarching strategy for fighting and defeating terrorism. As recent polling, the web video, and the Administration’s piecemeal, political actions in determining how to deal with the terrorist threat make clear, that strategy doesn’t exist – and that has the American people concerned. Is the Administration prepared to do develop that strategy?

U.S. faces limited options in Pakistan

(Washington Post) As Taliban forces edged to within 60 miles of Islamabad, the Obama administration urgently asked for new assessments of whether Pakistan's government would survive ...

Iraq prime minister ties Saddam regime to captured Al Qaida commander

from WorldTribune.com

BAGHDAD — The government of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Al Maliki said Al Qaida worked closely with former operatives in Saddam Hussein regime.

Officials said leading members of the Al Qaida network have coordinated operations with Saddam aides since 2003. They said Al Qaida and Saddam forces attacked Shi'ites in an effort to spark a civil war in Iraq.

"They agreed that Al Qaida would carry out the suicide attacks, while the Baathists [Saddam's ruling party] would do the remote-control bombs," Al Maliki said.

The Al Qaida-Saddam link, asserted by then-U.S. President George Bush in 2002, came in wake of the reported capture of a leading Al Qaida commander in Iraq.

The government has determined that an Iraqi Sunni arrested in April 2009 was Abu Omar Al Baghdadi, identified as the head of the the Islamic State of Iraq, an umbrella group that contained Al Qaida.

Netanyahu heads for collision with Obama administration

(Compiler's note: This is an interesting, must read analysis -- one that is predicting our national upcoming direction in dealing with a country that voices and acts to show it's desire for the destruction of the U.S. and Israel.)

from DEBKAfile

Israeli president Shimon Peres' task in Washington on May 4-5 is to blunt the sharp edge the White House is honing to force Israel to toe the new Washington line on the Palestinians, Syria and Iran.

Prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu can expect the full force of a bludgeon to be wielded in his White House talks on May 18.

DEBKAfile's Washington sources report that their host is fired up to be the first US president in decades of close friendship and cooperation to clash openly with Israel and the bulk of US Jewry. Oblivious to Israel's claim of US support for its security in a hostile regional environment, Barack Obama is expected to squeeze the Netanyahu government hard for immediate engagement on the Middle East conflict without further delay.

According to our sources, the White House staff is working at top speed on options for imposing its will.

Peres and Netanyahu will be informed that Washington is setting up two trilateral peace commissions to hammer out peace accords between Israel and the Palestinians and Israel with the Syrians.

US officials in both chairs will intercede with their own ideas to prevent them running into deadlock on disputed issues. DEBKAfile's sources confirm that the Obama administration will not spare the whip to force the parties into line.

The US president and his top advisers are convinced that the Palestinian problem is the main obstacle to accommodations for Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Iran. Defense secretary Robert Gates and national security adviser Gen. James Jones are the leading advocates of this proposition, with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton more skeptical but ready to back the president's Middle East determination to place Israel in the first line of fire.

Some of DEBKAfile's US sources admit that President Obama is himself under pressure because, despite the high approval rating he gained for his first 100 days in office, his myriad policy initiatives have yet to show results.

His economic remedies have steadied the banking system but not yet filtered down to the general public, he faces a hard slog in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan before making headway, and Tehran is playing hardball at every turn on the road to dialogue.

The only arena where the White House can hope for quick results is the Israel-Palestinian-Syrian track.

The two peace conferences in preparation recall Bill Clinton's success in forcing the Serbs, Bosnians and Croats to sign the Dayton Accord of 1995, so terminating a war of three-and-a-half years.

The presidential envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, was the architect of Dayton. George Mitchell, Obama's Middle East envoy, is in line for a similar role today. During his two rounds of talks in Middle East capitals, Mitchell has shown a smiling, genial face, but said little, while in Washington, a State Department team is working overtime on a new American "road map."

It starts out with pressure on Israel to freeze settlement activity on the West Bank and construction in East Jerusalem. At a later stage, Israel would be pushed to abandon large sections of the West Bank, remove authorized communities as well as unauthorized outposts and hand over the historic nucleus of Jerusalem.

Finally, the Israeli government would be required to accept an independent Palestinian state, even if its government is dominated by the rejectionist terrorist group Hamas.

Peres and Netanyahu will find administration officials deaf not only on Israel's arguments on the Palestinian issue but on a nuclear-armed Iran too. They will see the US president no longer prioritizing the suspension of Iran's nuclear aspirations, but bent on establishing a new Persian Gulf order that formalizes Iran's rising power. Washington's objective now is negotiations for setting the boundaries of Iran's Middle East expansion and limits for its nuclear program.

Israel will have no say in this process. In fact, by elevating Iran to premier regional power, America is sidelining its longstanding friends, Israel and Egypt, and setting aside their security and strategic interests for the sake of deals with Iran.

Dennis Ross, US envoy for Iran, carried this message to the capitals of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf, last week.

But Obama's new Middle East design is not without powerful opponents:

1. Tehran itself will not let Washington dictate the limits of its expanding influence but insists on dialogue taking place amid "equality and mutual respect." This attitude also governs its nuclear aspirations. US diplomats will have to make the running to temper the ayatollahs rather than the other way round.

2. Cairo and Riyadh will resist with all their might the US bid to anoint Iran the crowning Middle East-Gulf power. Both perceive Iran's nuclearization as the inevitable outcome of this policy.

They are also extremely concerned by Oabana's public endorsement of Turkey as the senior Muslim power in the Eastern Mediterranean and Central Asia, a boost for Ankara's aspirations to resuscitate the Ottoman Empire.

3. Jerusalem will resist being cast into a peripheral role in the strategic and military processes going forward with regard to Iran, the Palestinians, Syria and their terrorist arms, Hizballah and Hamas, all of which bear pivotally on Israel's future existence. Like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, the Netanyahu government may not accept being crushed between two hostile regional powers, Iran and Turkey, whose aggressive pretensions Washington is promoting.

- Netanyahu is marshalling all Israel's resources, including an active role for President Peres, to avoid dropping into the role of second- or third-rate Middle East power whom no one consults.

Peres, whose rich diplomatic experience and international reputation make him a prime asset, has been pressed into service to become the first Israeli president to step out of his ceremonial role into active-policy-making.

- The Israeli prime minister will also take advantage of the interests Jerusalem shares with Cairo and Riyadh in frustrating the new Washington orientation – and not only with regard to Iran.

Netanyahu and Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak have arranged to put their heads together and are meeting before their separate trips to Washington.

- Israel has not abandoned its option of a military strike against Iran's nuclear installations and its economic infrastructure. US officials, led by the defense secretary, are accordingly pouring contempt on the extent of the damage Israel is capable of inflicting. Next, they will try and tie Israel's hands by discrediting Netanyahu and his administration.

- A final arrow in Netanyahu's quiver is the ability to enlist American public opinion, which is traditionally supportive and sympathetic to Israel, against Obama's Grand Middle East Design. He will seek to canvass support among friends in the US Congress and the Jewish community.

China has 'canceled US credit card': lawmaker

(Compiler's note: Must read. The great bailout is coming to an end.)

WASHINGTON (AFP) — China, wary of the troubled US economy, has already "canceled America's credit card" by cutting down purchases of debt, a US congressman said Thursday.

China has the world's largest foreign reserves, believed to be mostly in dollars, along with around 800 billion dollars in US Treasury bonds, more than any other country.

But Treasury Department data shows that investors in China have sharply curtailed their purchases of bonds in January and February.

Representative Mark Kirk, a member of the House Appropriations Committee and co-chair of a group of lawmakers promoting relations with Beijing, said China had "very legitimate" concerns about its investments.

"It would appear, quietly and with deference and politeness, that China has canceled America's credit card," Kirk told the Committee of 100, a Chinese-American group. ....

The storms are here

from LDS Church News

President Gordon B. Hinckley highlighted the "portent of stormy weather ahead to which we had better give heed" in an October 1998 general priesthood meeting address. He called on members to put their homes in order.

Now, more than a decade later, the storms are here.

"The economic clouds that have long threatened the world are now fully upon us," said Elder Robert D. Hales. "The impact of this economic storm on our Heavenly Father's children requires a gospel vision of welfare today more than ever before."

Speaking to priesthood and Relief Society leaders in a newly released DVD created by the Church, titled, "Basic Principles of Welfare and Self-Reliance," Elder Hales of the Quorum of the Twelve begins the discussion by sharing "a gospel vision of the priesthood principles of welfare."

Priesthood-based welfare principles are both temporal and spiritual, he said. They are eternal, and apply in every circumstance, whether rich or poor.

"This, then, is the gospel vision of welfare: to put our faith in Jesus Christ into action. We serve others as the Spirit directs," he said.

What, then, he asked, are these principles of welfare? How can we apply them as spiritual and temporal building blocks in our daily lives?

The first building block is to live providently. "This means joyfully living within our means and preparing for the ups and downs of life so that we can be ready for the rainy-day emergencies.

"Provident living means not coveting the things of this world. It means using the resources of the earth wisely and not being wasteful, even in times of plenty. Provident living means avoiding excessive debt and being content with what we have.

"We live in an age of entitlement," he continued. "Many believe they should have all that others have — right now. Unable to delay gratification, they go into debt to buy what they cannot afford. The results always affect both their temporal and spiritual welfare."

When we go into debt, he said, "We give away some of our precious, priceless agency and place ourselves in self-imposed servitude. We obligate our time, energy and means to repay what we have borrowed — resources that could have been used to help ourselves, our families and others."

To pay debts and avoid future debt requires faith in the Savior, Elder Hales said. "It takes great faith to utter those simple words, 'We can't afford it.' It takes faith to trust that life will be better as we sacrifice our wants in order to meet our own and others' needs.

"I testify," Elder Hales declared, "that happy is the man who lives within his means and is able to save a little for future needs. As we live providently and increase our gifts and talents, we become more self-reliant. Self-reliance is taking responsibility for our own spiritual and temporal welfare and for those whom Heavenly Father has entrusted to our care. Only when we are self-reliant can we truly emulate the Savior in serving and blessing others."

To live self-reliantly raises the question, "How do we obtain Heavenly Father's help so that we have enough for our own needs and also enough to serve others?"

Fundamental to the principles of welfare is the payment of tithes and offerings.

"With the payment of tithes, we also learn to control our desires and appetites for the things of this world, to be honest in our dealings with our fellowmen, and to make sacrifices for others.

"As our faith grows, so will our desire to keep the commandment to pay fast offerings," Elder Hales said. "Freely giving allows us to follow the pattern of the Savior, who freely gave His life for all mankind."

Some of the most important welfare building blocks have to do with preparing for the future.

Three areas of preparation for the future include:

Budgeting for the future by making a spending and savings plan, carefully making and keeping a family or personal budget, reviewing the budget in a family council allowing children to learn and practice wise spending habits, and to participate in planning and saving for the future.

Education for the future by earning educational degrees or vocational training and finding gainful employment. Work hard to become a valued, essential part of the organization. For those seeking employment, "This is an opportunity to rely on the Lord, to grow, and to be strengthened. If you are seeking a new job, increase your faith in the Lord's desire and power to bless you."

If necessary, change lifestyles, and possibly the place of residence, to live within your means. Above all, express your gratitude in prayer for all that has been given to you.

Spiritual preparation for rainy days. This comes by keeping the commandments, praying, reading the scriptures, and relying upon the Holy Ghost. "By our obedience we store up the faith we need to meet the vicissitudes and challenges of life.

"Keeping ourselves unspotted from the world — being 'good' in this way — we are able to do good for our brothers and sisters throughout the world, both temporally and spiritually."

Here in America

(Compiler's note: This is a must read - see. The song you are about to listen to is from a Las Vegas Diamond Rio Concert. They received an immediate resounding standing ovation, and continue to do so every time they perform it!

Sadly, major radio stations wouldn't play it because it was considered 'politically incorrect'. Consequently, the song was never released to the Public. So America, see what you think.)

Guess how DHS defines who is a terrorist now? 2nd 'domestic extremism' report includes 'alternative media,' 'tax resisters' in lexicon

By Drew Zahn

Two weeks before the U.S. Department of Homeland Security penned its controversial report warning against "right-wing extremists" in the United States, it generated a memo defining dozens of additional groups – animal rights activists, black separatists, tax protesters, even worshippers of the Norse god Odin – as potential "threats."

Though the "Domestic Extremism Lexicon" was reportedly rescinded almost immediately, Benjamin Sarlin of The Daily Beast recently obtained and published online a copy of the unclassified memo, dated March 26, 2009.

While many of the groups listed in the lexicon – such as Aryan prison gangs and neo-Nazis – may indeed be widely considered extremists, others will likely take offense at being described as a potential "threat."

Are you ready for a second Declaration of Independence? Sign the petition promoting true freedom once again!

For example, the memo defines the "tax resistance movement" – also referred to in the report as the tax protest movement or the tax freedom movement – as "groups or individuals who vehemently believe taxes violate their constitutional rights. Among their beliefs are that wages are not income, that paying income taxes is voluntary, and that the 16th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which allowed Congress to levy taxes on income, was not properly ratified."

The report, however, continues in its assessment of tax protesters, asserting that members "have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism in an attempt to advance their extremist goals."

Similarly, the lexicon concludes its definition of "black separatists" by asserting, "Such groups or individuals also may embrace radical religious beliefs. Members have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence directed toward local law enforcement in an attempt to advance their extremist goals."

In his blog piece titled "Who You Calling an Extremist?" Sarlin writes, "Partisans leapt to decry the first DHS memo as part of a Democratic conspiracy to marginalize right wingers. But it became clear that DHS's broad descriptions of extremists were symptomatic of an ongoing agency problem that crossed ideological lines."

The lexicon states its purpose is to provide "definitions for key terms and phrases that often appear in DHS analysis that addresses the nature and scope of the threat that domestic, non-Islamic extremism poses to the United States."

Apparently, the DHS analyzes the "threat" level of Internet news websites like WorldNetDaily, for the lexicon defines "alternative media" as "a term used to describe various information sources that provide a forum for interpretations of events and issues that differ radically from those presented in mass media products and outlets."

The term "black power," widely used in a variety of contexts, also merits a definition in the lexicon: "A term used by black separatists to describe their pride in and the perceived superiority of the black race."

The DHS memo also includes precursors to the ill-fated "Right-wing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment" report, which prompted outrage from legislators and a campaign calling for the resignation of DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano.

For example, the lexicon contains virtually the same broad-stroke language the right-wing extremism report used.

"Rightwing extremism," the lexicon defines as those "who can be broadly divided into those who are primarily hate-oriented, and those who are mainly antigovernment and reject federal authority in favor of state or local authority. This term also may refer to rightwing extremist movements that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

The lexicon further points to those who oppose driver's licenses for illegal immigrants.

"Anti-immigration extremism," the lexicon defines as "a movement of groups or individuals who are vehemently opposed to illegal immigration, particularly along the U.S. southwest border with Mexico, and who have been known to advocate or engage in criminal activity and plot acts of violence and terrorism to advance their extremist goals. They are highly critical of the U.S. Government's response to illegal immigration and oppose government programs that are designed to extend 'rights' to illegal aliens, such as issuing driver's licenses or national identification cards and providing in-state tuition, medical benefits, or public education."

Unlike the right-wing extremism report, however, the lexicon includes definitions of extremism across a broad spectrum of issues: anarchy, animal rights extremism, black nationalism, Cuban independence, environmentalism, Jewish extremism, Mexican separatism, right-wing militias, white supremacists, the anti-war movement and more.

Among the more curious groups the DHS appears to be monitoring is the "racial Nordic mysticism" group, defined as "an ideology adopted by many white supremacist prison gangs who embrace a Norse mythological religion, such as Odinism or Asatru."

Among the more comical definitions is the description given of what "racist skinheads" wear, enabling law officers, it appears, to identify skinheads by their preferred brand of footwear:

"Dress may include a shaved head or very short hair," the report states, "jeans, thin suspenders, combat boots or Doc Martens, a bomber jacket, and tattoos of Nazi-like emblems."

Sarlin, who first publicized the memo, reports that a spokesperson for DHS told him the memo was recalled "within minutes" of being issued but declined to offer any details on the reasons for its withdrawal.

Schumer Can't See 13 Million Jobless Americans In His Political Rush To Pass Amnesty

By Roy Beck

Did you think Senators might be too smart this year -- or too moral or at least too embarrassed -- to push for more foreign workers while millions of Americans are losing their jobs?

Such modest faith in U.S. Senators was dashed yesterday by the Senate Judiciary Committee in a first hearing of its immigration panel.

Senators made it clear that they are hopeful that the American people will let them pass the amnesty this year that was blocked in 2007.

And the Senators made it clear that the only thing that will stop the Senate from passing an amnesty for illegal foreign workers this year is if regular citizens like you mount immediate and sustained protests.

They said they really think Americans have become resigned to an amnesty.

Perhaps the saddest part of the hearing yesterday was that the Senators didn't even acknowledge that 13 million unemployed U.S. workers should be part of the consideration of what to do about immigration.

All but one of the witnesses spoke of immigration without any reference to America's jobless.

We could have expected as much from the new immigration chairman -- Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY). He helped pass the first amnesty in 1986 and has never stopped working against the interests of vulnerable U.S. workers.

But especially disheartening was the mostly agreement from the ranking Republican on the immigration panel, Sen. Cornyn of Texas. He and Schumer said they are agreed on most aspects of what needs to be done. Cornyn is a constantly frustrating figure. His immigration grade is pretty good because the citizens of Texas pound him before every vote and generally get him to do the right thing. But in between he gives all sorts of comfort to the enemies of American workers and communities.

What every Senator needs to hear is that it would be politically stupid and morally bankrupt for the Senate to even consider giving permanent work permits to 8 million illegal foreign workers this year while 13 million jobless American workers would like to have their jobs.

Schumer named his hearing: "Comprehensive Immigration Reform in 2009, Can We Do It and How?"

It revealed that he has no interest in whether it would be a good idea or what the effects would be. No, the title says that Schumer sees this as just another of his political conquests. Huge special interests want this amnesty and Schumer is going to find out how he can pass it.

The hearing was a depressing spectacle: a labor leader with no regard for unemployed U.S. workers; a religious leader with no regard for obedience to the law or for suffering unemployed American families; a black civil rights leader with no regard for the incredible unemployment suffered by black Americans because of skyrocketed immigration numbers; a business leader with no regard for all the businesses in dire straits because of competitors who break immigration laws.

It was if Schumer wanted to make sure that everybody knows that the elite leaders of every segment of America have utter disdain for the common members of their constituencies.

Surprise: Former 'enemy combatant' admits helping Al-Qaeda

by Robert Spencer

The ACLU was enraged that he was being held unjustly. Now it turns out, by his own surprise admission, that he was an al-Qaeda op all along.

"Former 'enemy combatant' admits helping Al-Qaeda," from AFP, May 2 (thanks to James):

PEORIA, Illinois (AFP) -- Al-Qaeda sleeper agent Ali al-Marri, who was held by the United States without trial for more than five years as an “enemy combatant,” pleaded guilty Thursday to conspiring to provide material support to terrorism.

“Without a doubt, this case is a grim reminder of the seriousness of the threat we as a nation still face,” Attorney General Eric Holder said in a statement.

“But it also reflects what we can achieve when we have faith in our criminal justice system and are unwavering in our commitment to the values upon which the nation was founded and the rule of law.”

Marri, who was the last “enemy combatant” held on U.S. soil, faces a maximum of 15 years in jail after reaching a deal with prosecutors to drop a second charge in exchange for the guilty plea. He will be sentenced on July 30.

Marri admitted to attending several terrorist training camps in Pakistan from 1998 to 2001, according to an agreed statement of fact.

While there, he said he met Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, considered the architect of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

Marri entered the United States on September 10, 2001 with his wife and children ostensibly to study at an Illinois university.

The next day Al-Qaeda launched its attacks, and Marri continued to work for the terrorist organization by researching poisons such as cyanide and the location of dams, waterways and tunnels....

Obama may revive military commissions for trying detainees

(Compiler's note: This is a must read item.)

By William Glaberson

The Obama administration is moving toward reviving the military commission system for prosecuting Guantanamo detainees, which was much criticized during the Bush administration, including by Barack Obama himself.

Officials said the first public moves could come as soon as next week, perhaps in filings to military judges at the U.S. naval base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, outlining an administration plan to amend the Bush administration's system to provide more legal protections for terrorism suspects.

Obama administration officials — and Obama himself — have said in the past that they were not ruling out prosecutions in the military commission system. In congressional testimony Thursday, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, "The commissions are still very much on the table."

In a news conference this week, Attorney General Eric Holder emphasized that if the administration did use military commissions, the rules must give detainees "a maximum amount of due process."

But, speaking of detainees whom American officials have accused of involvement in major terrorist plots, Holder added, "It may be difficult for some of those high-value detainees to be tried in a normal federal court."

Senior officials have emphasized that they prefer to prosecute terrorism suspects in existing American courts. When the president suspended Guantanamo cases after his inauguration Jan. 20, many participants said the military commission system appeared dead.

But in recent days a variety of officials involved in the deliberations say that after administration lawyers examined many of the cases, the mood shifted toward using military commissions to prosecute some detainees.

US government to drop espionage charges against Aipac officials Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman accused of providing US defence secrets to Israeli em

The US government is to drop espionage charges against two officials of America's most powerful pro-Israel lobby group accused of spying for the Jewish state because court rulings had made the case unwinnable and the trial would disclose classified information. ....

CDC Warns Against Swine Flu

In an attempt to slow down the swine flu epidemic The CDC has this tip,

DON'T DO THIS!

"OK" -- Time to lighten up out there.

2012 Candidate for President of the USA

(Compiler's note: This man could well be our next president.)

I HAVE DECIDED TO BECOME A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE.
HERE IS MY PLATFORM:

(1) 'Press 1 for English' is immediately banned. English is the official language; speak it or wait at the border until you can.

(2) We will immediately go into a two year isolationist posture to straighten out the country's attitude.. NO imports, no exports. We will use the 'Wal-Mart 's policy, 'If we ain't got it, you don't need it.'

(3) When imports are allowed, there will be a 100% import tax on it.

(4) All retired military personnel will be required to man one of our many observation towers on the southern border (six month tour). They will be under strict orders not to fire on SOUTHBOUND aliens.

(5) Social security will immediately return to its original state. If you didn't put nuttin' in, you ain't getting' nuttin' out. The president nor any other politician will be able to touch it.


(6) Welfare - Checks will be handed out on Fridays at the end of the 40-hour school week and the successful completion of urinalysis and a passing grade.

(7) Professional Athletes--Steroids. The FIRST time you check positive you're banned for life.

(8) Crime - We will adopt the Turkish method, the first time you steal, you lose your right hand. There is no more life sentences. If convicted of murder, you will be put to death by the same method you chose for your victim; gun, knife, strangulation, etc.

(9) One export will be allowed, Wheat. The world needs to eat. A bushel of wheat will be the exact price of a barrel of oil.

(10) All foreign aid using American taxpayer money will immediately cease, and the saved money will pay off the national debt and ultimately lower taxes. When disasters occur around the world, we'll ask the American people if they want to donate to a disaster fund, and each citizen can make the decision whether it's a worthy cause.

(11) The Pledge of Allegiance will be said every day at school and every day in Congress.

(12) The National Anthem will be played at all appropriate ceremonies, sporting events, outings, etc..

Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes.


GOD BLESS AMERICA !


Bill Cosby

DNA databases prelude to return of eugenics? Warning issued over 'full genomic scans' on babies

By Bob Unruh

An organization that has been battling Minnesota state procedures in which DNA from every newborn is collected and warehoused says virtually all states do the same thing, and the alarming trend eventually could lead the United States back into eugenics.

The report from Twila Brase, president of the Citizens' Council on Health Care,says, "Throughout history, proponents of eugenics have focused on the reproduction of children, either through encouraging the 'healthy' to reproduce or discouraging the 'unhealthy' from procreation. This focus has been evidenced in history by 29 state sterilization laws … and the horrific Nazi campaign aimed at ridding Germany of the 'unfit' – the Jews, the physically deformed, the mentally retarded, the 'feebleminded,' the inferior, the epileptic, the deaf, the blind, 'those suffering from hereditary conditions,' the deviant 'asocial' and the politically dissident."

The report then continued, "That the focus on reproduction still exists today is more than troubling.

"The authors of a 2001 study 'were struck' by the large number of state government officials who agreed with a specific statement regarding assessment of a child's suitability for future reproduction," the report said. "Nineteen (54 percent) of 35 … respondents who routinely provide counseling – mostly newborn genetic screening follow-up staff at state health departments across the country – thought it important when giving advice to parents to 'identify children who might be, for genetic reasons, unsuitable choices for future reproduction,'" the report said. ....