And it is about time. When students get to high school without knowing nouns and verbs, much less punctuation rules, there is a problem. And sometimes the only solution is to teach the rules by the old "drill and kill" method, rather than by having children "explore" their way to proper grammar.

Direct grammar instruction, long thought to do more harm than good, is welcome once more.

Several factors -- most notably, the addition of a writing section to the SAT college entrance exam in 2005 -- have reawakened interest in Greiner's methods.

Nationwide, the Class of 2006 posted the lowest verbal SAT scores since 1996. That was the year the test was recalibrated to correct for a half-century decline in verbal performance.

Gaston Caperton, the College Board president, has lamented the scarcity of grammar and composition course work in public schools. In surveys, not quite two-thirds of students said they had studied grammar by the time they took the 2005 SAT.

Those concerns, and a growing consensus among scholars that many high school graduates "can't write well enough to get a passing grade from a professor on a paper," drove the addition of a third section to the SAT, upending decades of balance between reading and math, said Ed Hardin, a content specialist at the College Board.

Let's hope for a more literate future generation.

Posted by: Greg at 10:13 PM | Comments (167) | Add Comment
Post contains 234 words, total size 2 kb.

Otherwise the Houston Chroinicle missed the big story while reporting on the reaction of the Hispanic community (especially among those here illegally) to changes in HPD policies on working with immigration officials.

Immigration activist Maria Jimenez is quoted extensively in the article. But the attribution of comments becoenm indirect in the final paragraph.

"Everything is stalled on immigration reform," she said, but she nonetheless urged those who are eligible to vote, or who have family members who are, to cast their ballots in the upcoming election.

I've got no problem with her urging people to vote if they are eligible. I want to see every eligible voter vote. But this sentence could be read as a claim that Jimenez advocated the those ineligible to vote should vote if they have an eligible family member but are not eligible to vote themselves. I hope that she is not urging that fraudulent votes be cast. If that is what she called for, reporter Cynthia Leonor Garza missed the big story.

However, I hope that we are just seeing sloppy reporting/editting at the Houston Chronicle. It would not be the first time.

Posted by: Greg at 10:05 PM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 1 kb.

Of course, all it does is quote al-Qaeda leaders and show terrorist training films captured during the war on terror.

Republicans took a page from President Johnson's Cold War-era presidential campaign with an advertisement set to air this weekend called "The Stakes," which prominently features al Qaeda leaders threatening to kill Americans.

"Just like in the Cold War, the reality is that our nation is at war with an ideology and not a country," said Republican National Committee spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt.

Democrats, however, have called the commercial, which is reminiscent of Johnson's 1964 "Daisy" ad, a "desperate ploy to once again try to scare voters."

The advertisement, which is available on the Republican National Committee Web site, is scheduled to run on national news networks Sunday. Republicans are emphasizing national security and terrorism issues in their bid to maintain control of Congress with about two weeks before the November midterms.

And the offensive content?

The ad features al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, speaking, but the only sound is a ticking clock in the background. The terror leaders' quotes are posted on the screen and key phrases in the quotes stand alone as the rest of the quote fades out.

In one instance, bin Laden is quoted as saying, "With God's permission we call on everyone who believes in God ... to comply with His will to kill the Americans." As the text of the quote fades out, "kill the Americans" remains on the screen.

Another bin Laden quote: "They will not come to their senses unless the attacks fall on their heads and ... until the battle has moved inside America" -- fades out, leaving only "inside America" on the screen.

Meanwhile, footage of terrorists engaged in martial arts and weapons training rolls in the background. One scene shows terrorists traversing monkey bars over fire.

The ticking clock morphs into a heartbeat as the ad comes to a close, and the only spoken words on the commercial announce, "The Republican National Committee is responsible for the content of this advertising."

If the Democrats are really opposed to terrorism, how could they object to the content of the ad? They wouldn't be trying to hide the facts, would they?

Posted by: Greg at 01:19 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 387 words, total size 2 kb.

We keep hearing that women have high status in Islam. But then you get a book, popular in American mosques, written by a prominent Islamic leader, which advocates the following. It makes it clear what the practical status of women is in that religion.

When dealing with a "disobedient wife," a Muslim man has a number of options. First, he should remind her of "the importance of following the instructions of the husband in Islam." If that doesn't work, he can "leave the wife's bed." Finally, he may "beat" her, though it must be without "hurting, breaking a bone, leaving blue or black marks on the body and avoiding hitting the face, at any cost."

Such appalling recommendations, drawn from the book "Woman in the Shade of Islam" by Saudi scholar Abdul Rahman al-Sheha, are inspired by as authoritative a source as any Muslim could hope to find: a literal reading of the 34th verse of the fourth chapter of the Koran, An-Nisa , or Women. "[A]nd (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them," reads one widely accepted translation.

And for those who want to argue that the author of the book, a Saudi cleric, was representing a minority position or one held only abroad, consider the experience of the author only a few weeks after she received a copy.

Not long after I picked up the free Saudi book, Mahmoud Shalash, an imam from Lexington, Ky., stood at the pulpit of my mosque and offered marital advice to the 100 or so men sitting before him. He repeated the three-step plan, with "beat them" as his final suggestion. Upstairs, in the women's balcony, sat a Muslim friend who had recently left her husband, who she said had abused her; her spouse sat among the men in the main hall.

At the sermon's end, I approached Shalash. "This is America," I protested. "How can you tell men to beat their wives?"

"They should beat them lightly," he explained. "It's in the Koran."

And even one online audio sermon (now censored after the speaker was challenged on the issue) made the following suggestion.

Last October, I listened to an online audio sermon by an American Muslim preacher, Sheik Yusuf Estes, who was scheduled to speak at West Virginia University as a guest of the Muslim Student Association. He soon moved to the subject of disobedient wives, and his recommendations mirrored the literal reading of 4:34. First, "tell them." Second, "leave the bed." Finally: "Roll up a newspaper and give her a crack. Or take a yardstick, something like this, and you can hit."

An imam from Kentucky, addressing a mosque in West Virginia. Telling the men to beat their wives.

And yet the feminists are silent about Islam.

I've been accused of hatred and bigotry for daring to suggest that there is something fundamentally barbaric about Islam. But my (liberal) critics fail to address the barbarism of the teaching that women should be beaten. They would insist that any Christian organization that advocated domestic violence be banned from every college campus in the nation -- but they are supportive of the presence of Muslim organizations that advocate physical abuse of disobedient women as a mark of diversity and pluralism.

I'm sorry -- such diversity and pluralism are not useful or needed anywhere in our society. Fundamental respect for women requires taht we condemn such teachings and the violence and sexual assault that come with them. Islam must change -- or Islam must be rejected, marginalized and excluded.

Unless, of course, we in the civilized world wish to reconsider our views against the physical and sexual abuse of women, and adopt the "enlightened" ways of Islam.

Posted by: Greg at 01:09 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 634 words, total size 4 kb.

Garry Trudeau has gotten a bad rap from conservatives over the years -- some of it deserved, some of it not. But I think we need to acknowledge some basic human decency on his part and how it serves as a counterpoint to how the Left responded to Vietnam vets -- and how some respond to the vets of today's War on Terror.

IN THE BANQUET ROOM WERE MEN WHO WERE BLIND, men with burns, men with gouges, men missing an arm, men missing a leg, men missing an arm and a leg, men missing an arm and both legs, men missing parts of their faces, and a cartoonist from the funny pages.

We were just a few blocks from the White House, at Fran O'Brien's Steak House. Fran's was hosting a night out for casualties of the current war, visiting from their hospital wards.

It's hard to know what to say to a grievously injured person, and it's easy to be wrong . You could do what I did, for example. Scrounging for the positive, I cheerfully informed a young man who had lost both legs and his left forearm that at least he's lucky he's a righty. Then he wordlessly showed me his right hand, which is missing fingertips and has limited motion -- an articulated claw. That shut things right up, for both of us, and it would have stayed that way, except the cartoonist showed up.

Garry Trudeau, the creator of "Doonesbury," hunkered right down in front of the soldier, eye to eye, introduced himself and proceeded to ignore every single diplomatic nicety.

"So, when were you hit?" he asked.

"October 23."

Trudeau pivoted his body. "So you took the blast on, what . . . this side?"

"Yeah."

Brian Anderson, 25, was in shorts, a look favored by most of the amputees, who tend to wear their new prostheses like combat medals. His legs are metal and plastic, blue and knobby at the knee, shin poles culminating abruptly in sneakers.

Trudeau surveyed Brian's intact arm. "You've got dots."

"Yeah." Dots are soldier-speak for little beads of shrapnel buried under the skin. Sometimes they take a lifetime to work their way back to the surface. At this, Brian became fully engaged and animated, smiling and talking about the improvised explosive device that took his vehicle out; about his rescue; his recovery; his plans for the future. Trudeau, it turned out, had given him what he needed.

("In these soldiers' minds," Trudeau will explain afterward, "their whole identity, who they are right now, is what happened to them. They want to tell the story, they want to be asked about it, and you're honoring them by listening. The more they revisit it, the less power it has over them.")

And this is not a PR visit -- this is a part of who Trudeau is. Indeed, it is a part of his body of work, having maimed the beloved B.D. in Iraq and walked with him through recovery, rehab and post-traumatic stress. He may have a problem with the war and the president, but he behaves as a man of decency -- and a patriot.

God bless you Garry Trudeau.

Posted by: Greg at 12:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 549 words, total size 3 kb.

Let's be honest -- we all know he did it, even if the prosecution did screw up the case so badly that they could not possibly have gotten a conviction. And while I may reject the notion of a civil liability for a crime following a Not Guilty verdict in a criminal trial, that doesn't change my certainty that OJ killed Ron and Nicole.

Now he may have confessed -- hypothetically, of course.

ELEVEN years after O J Simpson walked free from America’s most controversial murder trial, the former star athlete is at the centre of a row over reports that he is being paid $3.5m for an autobiography in which he describes how he “hypothetically” might have murdered his ex-wife and her male friend.

* * *

The National Enquirer’s account could not be verified this weekend but the newspaper provided extensive details in a four-page report on what it called a “tell-all blockbuster”. Simpson is said to describe how he “grabbed a knife from a man who accompanied him to Nicole’s home — and moments later found himself covered in blood and looking down on the bodies of Nicole and Ron”.

The other man is identified only as “Charlie”. No mention of an accomplice or witness emerged at either of Simpson’s trials, but according to the book, “Charlie” had earlier paid Simpson a late-night visit and passed on gossip about Brown and other men, prompting Simpson to “explode” in rage.

“Simpson prefaces these key pages by almost half-heartedly claiming that this part of the book is ‘hypothetical’,” the Enquirer reported. Simpson is said to have written that he stormed around to Brown’s Los Angeles home to confront her. He grabbed a knife he kept in his Ford Bronco car, but “Charlie” snatched it away from him.

According to the Enquirer, the book describes a series of arguments between Simpson, Goldman and Brown. Simpson snatched his knife back from “Charlie” and launched into a “blur” of violence.

When he saw the couple lying dead on the pavement, “OJ says he was in a daze, asking himself who’d done it,” the Enquirer reported. “He was still trying to work out what happened when a terrified Charlie whispered ‘Jesus Christ, OJ, what have you done?’” Simpson’s lawyers made no comment on the allegations last week. Other legal sources said there was no danger that Simpson could be prosecuted again for the crimes — however “hypothetical” his confession — under America’s double jeopardy laws forbidding retrial after acquittal.

Granted, this is originally from the National Enquirer, but they have been known to get scoops like this from time to time. And this would explain why OJ Simpson is playing golf rather than looking for the real killer like he promised.

By the way -- might "Charlie" be OJ's old buddy, Al Cowlings?

Posted by: Greg at 02:04 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 474 words, total size 3 kb.

To us in the West, that is a line from a Monty Python movie.

In Iran and other parts of the Islamic world, it is a reality, due to the imposition of sharia law. Article 83 of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran, as one example, declares stoning to death a permissible punishment for some types of adultery.

This needs to be read by every American -- indeed, by ever citizen of the civilized world. I've put the more graphic details below the fold.

Hello.

I read your recent article about stoning to death.

Reading your article reminded me of the bleeding bruises in my heart once again.

You wrote about murdering by stoning.

more...

Posted by: Greg at 01:47 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 734 words, total size 5 kb.

Well, that is the analysis by Barron's Magazine, being touted by Drudge.

BARRON'S COVER Survivor!
The GOP Victory

By JIM MCTAGUE

JUBILANT DEMOCRATS SHOULD RECONSIDER their order for confetti and noisemakers, BARRON's claims in their next edition. The Democrats, as widely reported, are expecting GOP-weary voters to flock to the polls in two weeks and hand them control of the House for the first time in 12 years -- and perhaps the Senate, as well. Even some Republicans privately confess that they are anticipating the election-day equivalent of Little Big Horn. Pardon our hubris, but we just don't see it.

Our analysis -- based on a race-by-race examination of campaign-finance data -- suggests that the GOP will hang on to both chambers, at least nominally. We expect the Republican majority in the House to fall by eight seats, to 224 of the chamber's 435. At the very worst, our analysis suggests, the party's loss could be as large as 14 seats, leaving a one-seat majority. But that is still a far cry from the 20-seat loss some are predicting. In the Senate, with 100 seats, we see the GOP winding up with 52, down three.

I still have hope.

Posted by: Greg at 01:32 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 213 words, total size 1 kb.

A great day for the integrity of American elections. Now we just need such laws in 49 other states and the District of Columbia.

The Supreme Court ruled yesterday that Arizona may enforce a new state law requiring voters to show a photo identification card at the polls on Election Day this year, despite a pending lawsuit by opponents who say the measure will disenfranchise the poor, minorities and the elderly.

In its unanimous five-page ruling, the court did not decide whether the Arizona law was constitutional. Rather, it overturned a federal appeals court in San Francisco that would have blocked enforcement of the law until the opponents' suit could be decided.

That would take too long, the court said, noting that, "in view of the impending election," Arizona needed "clear guidance."

The actual impact of the Arizona law, which was approved in a statewide referendum two years ago but has not yet been applied, was still too unclear to justify changing the state's plans so close to Nov. 7, the justices said.

What is the requirement?

Arizona, which borders Mexico and has seen a surge in migration in recent years, is one of several states that have recently enacted a photo-ID requirement in response to reports that illegal immigrants and other ineligible voters have been casting ballots.

The Arizona law requires voters not only to present proof of citizenship when they register but also to present a photo ID when they go to the polls. Those without a photo ID may cast a provisional ballot, but their votes do not count unless they can produce a valid identification card within five days.

It requires proof of identity and residence -- hardly unreasonable. And it provides a method for those who don't have the identification on Election day to have their vote count. The IDs are even free if you cannot afford them.

Now if only we could find a way to require proof of citizenship as well.

By the way, while the Court's opinion said it is not ruling on the merits of the case, this decision makes me believe that they lean in favor of the identification requirement. If there was a serious probablility of the anti-identification forces winning, they would have enjoined enforcement.

Posted by: Greg at 01:18 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 390 words, total size 3 kb.

1) They’ve never been willing to interfere with Hezbollah terrorist attacks, and have even flow the Hezbollah flag with their own. Now the United Nations Interim Force In Lebanon -- so-called "peace keepers" -- wants to shoot down Israeli airplanes engaged in acts of self-defense. Is it “US out of the UN/Un Out of the US” time yet?

2) The Vatican says Christians and Muslims must stand together against terrorism. WeÂ’ve done it, they havenÂ’t. Dialogue and understanding can go nowhere until they do.

3) Gee – they may as well be talking about my Democrat critic.

Activist efforts to limit America's free marketplace of ideas -- such as the tactic of slandering commonsense criticism as "Islamophobia" -- are contrary to the very foundation of democratic governance.

Just because a liberal or minority disagrees with a comment does not make it racist, bigoted, or hateful – or even wrong. By the way, you might consider checking out the proposed methods of dealing with jihadi terrorism – they are spot-on.

4) More global warming hysteria – which overlooks the fact that Greenland is called GREENland for a reason. Receding glaciers are a reversion to the status quo at the time of Greenland’s discovery condition in the time of Eric the Red and Lief Ericson. I'm curious -- what produced the "global warming that created those conditions? Or had something happened to cause "global cooling"? Or -- horrors -- might the current warming trend be part of a centuries/millenia-long pattern of warming and cooling?

5) Somehow this got overlooked in reporting of the defensive action by Israel against Hezbollah’s terrorists – Hezbollah was using cluster bombs against Israel. Israel was roundly condemned for doing so, but the actions of Hezbollah were covered-up. Could it be another sign of the anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist stance taken by the world media?

6) Muslims Gone Wild! Another example of Islamic tolerance and respect for human rights.

7) Run silent, run deep, Check out the most silent and deadly attack submarine on earth – part of the fleet of the SWEDISH navy!

Do-it-yourself abortion on day of scheduled delivery not illegal – judge dismisses charges against woman who shot herself in the stomach to murder her baby. Pro-choices support the decision in this article. Does anyone want to defend it here?

9) Why should anyone with sense oppose socialist socialized medicine? Maybe you should consider this horrendous outcome that puts economic efficiency ahead of human life.

10) Is it treason yet? CNN shows terorist "snuff films" of sniper attacks on US troops. I’ll bet they would have gladly aired Nazi propaganda films of the “heroic” SS defending their positions against the Allied “invaders” to present the “unvarnished truth” about D-Day, spliced with clips of an exclusive interview with Adolph Hitler.

11) Dem staffer suspended for leaking classified information to the press (and therefore to the enemy). Democrats are outraged – that the Republican chairman of the House Intelligence Committee would take action to safeguard our nation’s military and intelligence secrets. I guess the only thing they believe should remain hidden from public view is the Plame Name. More from Michelle Malkin and Captain Ed.

12) Don’t speak ill of any Islamic practice – it could “incite” Muslims to violence. And your friendly neighborhood supporters of terrorists at CAIR want to make sure doing so does. My take – “Hurrah for John Gibson!”

13) You've got to see the picture with this story -- Bambi was feeling mighty playful when he saw this cross-country runner.

Posted by: Greg at 12:35 PM | Comments (15) | Add Comment
Post contains 593 words, total size 6 kb.

I guess I don't find any of this to be a big deal. After all, what the board of the institution has done is indicate it is going to stay within the bounds of what has always been Baptist custom and practice.

Trustees at a Baptist seminary have put it in writing: They will not tolerate any promotion of speaking in tongues on their campus.

The 36-1 vote Tuesday came nearly two months after the Rev. Dwight McKissic of Arlington said during a chapel service at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary that he sometimes speaks in tongues while praying.

McKissic, a new trustee at the Fort Worth school, passed the lone dissenting vote on the resolution.

It states: "Southwestern will not knowingly endorse in any way, advertise, or commend the conclusions of the contemporary charismatic movement including private prayer language. Neither will Southwestern knowingly employ professors or administrators who promote such practices."

As an organization, Baptists (especially Southern Baptists) are not charismatic/pentecostal in their theological stance. As a seminary, the school is indicating that it will anchor itself to baptist tradition.

That isn't to say that I have a problem with any of the spiritual practices the school disassociates itself from -- I remain neutral on the validity of them.

Frankly, I'd be shocked if it did not -- and would hope that any seminary of any denomination would cling to its its doctrinal anchors.

Posted by: Greg at 10:30 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 254 words, total size 2 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are Trauma, Passivity, & the Fear of Aggression by ShrinkWrapped, and Prison Jihad? by The Weekly Standard.  Here is where you can see the full results of the vote.

Here are the full tallies of all votes cast:

Posted by: Greg at 10:19 PM | Comments (20) | Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 5 kb.

This terrorist plot looks like a direct attempt to shut down this blog. The other six stadiums are just a distraction from their true target.

After all, my wife and I will be in our customary seats in Reliant Stadium.

A Web site is claiming that seven NFL football stadiums -- including Houston's -- will be hit with radiological dirty bombs this weekend, but the government today expressed doubts about the threat.

The warning, posted Oct. 12, was part of an ongoing Internet conversation titled "New Attack on America Be Afraid." It mentioned NFL stadiums in New York, Miami, Atlanta, Seattle, Houston, Oakland and Cleveland, where games are scheduled for this weekend.

The Homeland Security Department alerted authorities and stadium owners in those cities, as well as the NFL, of the Web message but said the threat was being viewed "with strong skepticism." Officials at the NCAA, which oversees college athletics, said they too had been notified.

Houston-based FBI officials would not comment on any security measures that might occur as a result of the threat to detonate a dirty bomb at Reliant Stadium and the six other NFL stadiums throughout the nation.

"But, we always have a presence at the games and at major events," said FBI Special Agent Shauna Dunlap.

If I don't go watch NFL football, the terrorists win.

GO TEXANS!

Jawa Report has done great work covering this story -- including posting the threat and the site in question. Gateway Pundit connects the dots to previous terrorist threats.

Posted by: Greg at 12:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 268 words, total size 2 kb.

Some articles of note that you might want to look to.

1) We were told that the Enron case conviction of Ken Lay proved that the law applied the rich and powerful just like it does to everyone else. Guess what – now folks are upset because the law is being applied to Ken Lay just as it is to everyone else!

2) HmmmmmÂ…. Top Dem makes a statement indicating that a black Republican is a slave. IÂ’m curious, where are the leftist sensitivity police on this one? Malkin has more.

3) Italian journalist who converted to Islam kidnapped by jihadis in Afghanistan – who demand the return of an Afghan convert to Christianity for application of the sharia penalty for apostasy )which is, of course, death). Am I the only one who smells a set-up here? Better idea – the civilized world will keep the Christian and the followers of the Religion of barbarism can keep their co-religionist. Malkin weighs in on this one

4) Service dog dies after saving owner from fire cause by cat – while trying to save the cat.

5) We are a nation of over 300,000,000. Notice the statistics on foreign-born individuals –and realize that the population would be 10-20 million less if we actively deported border-jumping immigration criminals.

6) One of these could ruin the whole day of our enemies. And to think such weapons wee the stuff of science fiction only a few decades ago!

7) Donna Shalala proves she is still a typical Democrat – "I believe that the young men we have recruited for our football team are young men of great character. But they did a very bad thing." Wasn’t that what she said about Slick Willie, too?

Arab-American group sues to find out if terror deportees disproportionately Arab and Muslim – tells America to ignore the fact that the 9/11 hijackers were disproportionately Arab and Muslim.

9) Muslim group condemns second Koran in toilet at university in NYC. Conveniently, the group fails to condemn murders of Christians or honor killings by fellow Muslims.

10) For that matter, the group in the above story also has failed to condemn this attack upon a pro-Israel editor in Pakistan – or his trial on sedition charges for advocating diplomatic relations between that Muslim country and the Jewish state.

11) Gay terrorist Mike Rogers – making homophobia a legitimate political strategy since 2004. I guess “It’s just about sex” only applies to Democrats. Captain Ed has a great commentary on Rogers’ strategy of left-wing homophobia. IowaHawk has this humorous insight on possible Democrat moves to make use of Rogers' efforts.

12) Desperate Democrat rips opponent over her cheesy romance novel. Have you no issues?

13) It may surprise you to discover I support the plaintiff in this suit – but think any damage award should be nominal. After all – how much “emotional distress” should a reasonable individual have over a dismissed ticket? But then again, she does appear to suffer from BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome).

14) But look what has been banned as “patently offensive” speech at Marquette University.

“As Americans we must always remember that we all have a common enemy, an enemy that is dangerous, powerful, and relentless. I refer, of course, to the federal government.”
-- Dave Berry

15) During his days as Russian dictator, didnÂ’t this guy defend the Berlin Wall, which was designed to keep the people of East Germany prisoners of their own government? ShouldnÂ’t he have faced a trial for crimes against humanity by now?

Posted by: Greg at 12:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 598 words, total size 6 kb.

I don't smoke. I consider it a disgusting habit, and question the sanity of those who engage in it. I've watched too many friends and family members die of smoking-related illnesses.

But I oppose the half-hearted "smoking ban" measures that are being proposed and implemented here in Houston and other places in the US.

As Houston debates whether to ban smoking in bars, cities across the country are enacting their own smoking bans, adding fuel to a movement that has gained momentum during the past few years.

In the two weeks since Mayor Bill White released a draft ordinance to extend the city's ban, which council members will consider today, at least four smaller municipalities across the country, as well as France, have banned smoking in restaurants and bars.

Houston's decision could affect how state lawmakers approach the issue, said Joe Cherner, an expert on the smoking-ban movement and founder of BREATHE — Bar and Restaurant Employees Advocating Together for a Healthy Environment.

"If Houston passes a strong law, Texas will pass a law within a year," he predicted, based on how other states have reacted to bans by their largest cities.

Houston's existing law prohibits smoking in dining areas of restaurants but allows it at bars. Customers can smoke at bars within restaurants so long as the smoke doesn't drift into the dining area.

The mayor's proposed changes would extend the ban to bars but include some exemptions such as cigar shops, outdoor patios and some private functions.

Council members also will consider various amendments to the proposal. One would exempt stand-alone bars that were in operation before Sept. 1, and others would extend the ban to cigar shops and most outdoor patios.

The council is divided on the issue, so it's unclear which, if any, of the proposals has the best chance of being approved.

We have the evidence that smoking is harmful, and (arguably) that second-hand smoke is equally dangerous. And yet smoking continues to be legal in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Governmen continues to raise revenue off of the addiction of its citizens to a clearly dangerous substance. I find that unacceptable.

So I will come flat out and say it -- either we need to accept the liberty argument that people should be free to smoke, or we should accept the argument that cigars, cigarettes, snuff, chew, and other such products are so irredeemably dangerous that their production, sale, and possession should be banned. Quit the half-hearted measures and just do it.

Or just don't do it, and repeal all restrictions on the basis that adults have a right to do with their bodies what they want to do with them.

The middle ground on this issue is not principled and not in the public interest. Either be willing to follow the logical outcome of every study of the effects of tobacco on the grounds of public health, or admit that liberty dictates allowing people to make dangerous choices and businesses to cater to those choices if they desire.

Posted by: Greg at 10:31 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 522 words, total size 3 kb.

This might be of interest to my fellow diabetics.

Diabetics gained a new way of controlling their blood sugar levels Tuesday with federal approval of a novel pill for Type 2 diabetes, which affects about 20 million Americans.

The Food and Drug Administration said it approved Januvia, which enhances the body's own ability to lower blood sugar levels, after clinical trials showing the new pill works just as well as older diabetes drugs, but with fewer side effects like weight gain. The drug is made by Merck and Co. Inc.

* * *

Januvia, also known as sitagliptin phosphate, works with a one-two punch: It increases levels of a hormone that triggers the pancreas to produce more insulin to process blood sugar while simultaneously signaling the liver to quit making glucose. The pill does that by blocking production of an enzyme, called DPP-4, that normally inactivates that hormone.

Unfortunately, this drug may be out of reach for many Americans -- rather than the current $15.00 to $30.00 a month cost for the most common generic diabetes drugs, this one will cost nearly $150.00. Whether and when insurance companies will cover the medication and at what price level is unknown at this time.

Novartis is expecting approval of a similar medication by year's end.

Posted by: Greg at 10:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 1 kb.

Over the past 2 ½ years, I’ve given glimpses of my life to you. Probably the one thing that I’ve made most clear is that I am married o a woman I passionately love, and that I want to have as the center of my life for the rest of my life. You would also be aware that there are health issues in her life that are a source of great concern.

And for that reason, some changes are coming.

I plan on blogging a bit less – and I want to explain why.

IÂ’m up before sunup every morning, out the door by before dawn, and donÂ’t return home until for another 9-10 hours. I teach a night class that takes me out of my home several nights a week. That means my evenings with my wife are at a premium, especially since my return time is late enough that she will be asleep or ready for bed when I get home after class and so there is not any significant time to spend with her then.

And I look at how I have spent those evenings lately – including a bonus one last night, when torrential rains and flooding in the Houston area caused the cancellation of my night class – and I’m not happy.

I’ve spent them making replies to the Holocaust denying neo-Nazi troll who just won’t leave, despite my best efforts to rid my site of his filth. I’ve done the same with the filth-spewing “liberal” who can’t string three words together without one being a profane insult. I’ve made posts on my site and commented on others – and last night found myself doing battle with a thief who stole a photo off my site, among other things….

And then IÂ’ve spent what time is left with the woman that I love.

IÂ’ve been struggling with this issue for several days now, and driving in to school this morning, I found myself asking a basic question.

“What is your priority and why?”

And in one of those brutal epiphanies that are a part of life, I recognized that the answer I wanted to give wasnÂ’t well-reflected in my actions.

After all, this blog is simply not that important, but IÂ’ve let it become a driving force in my life to an extent that has ceased to be healthy. And IÂ’ve let it begin to take the place of what matters most in my life, allowing this hobby to become too time-consuming and too important.

And so I will be cutting back. I have to, for the sake of my own sanity and the happiness of the person I still want to spend the rest of my life with.

That will mean probably only one or two posts a day, and possibly days without any posts at all. It will mean putting the focus on the part of my life that really needs to be the priority – my wife, especially while she still enough has enough good days to balance out the bad ones that have slowly come to be more frequent over the last few months. I want to take those walks and long drives. I want to go shopping with her. I want to go out for a movie or dinner or take a romantic weekend away. And maybe I’d rather not have thoughts about possible posts, how to respond to commenters, and site traffic levels crowding out my attention to her when she needs it most.

In short, I need blogging to be less of a jealous and demanding mistress and more of a recreational diversion.

I hope folks will still come around. I hope people will still comment (well, maybe not KKKen or Nunya, but decent people), and maybe even link back to something that you like. But if the changes don’t meet with your approval, please know that I have appreciated your visits and wish you well – and hope you will still pop in from time to time.

And sweetheart, if you are reading this, know that IÂ’m sorry for too many evenings and weekends when IÂ’ve failed to give you your due. I know I canÂ’t make them up, but I can strive to do better.

Posted by: Greg at 05:44 PM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 715 words, total size 4 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are "As Long As We're Talking, We're Not Shooting At Each Other" by Right Wing Nut House, and Is Islam Waging War on the World? by Reconquista.  I have linked to both winning entries and to the full results of the vote.

Here are the full tallies of all votes cast:

Posted by: Greg at 10:47 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 225 words, total size 5 kb.

Lynne Stewart was once a great lawyer.

Sadly, while defending a client, she chose to become part of a criminal conspiracy to direct terrorist activities.

Convicted in federal court, she was sentenced yesterday for her crimes.

Lawyer Lynne Stewart was sentenced Monday to 28 months in prison for helping a terrorist client communicate with his followers, a far less severe sentence than the 30 years sought by federal prosecutors.

As U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl delivered his sentence in a packed federal courtroom in Manhattan, Stewart lifted her glasses and dabbed at tears while her husband gave a tight hug to their daughter. An hour later, the 67-year-old lawyer emerged from the federal courthouse holding hands with her granddaughter and grandson and, to loud cheers and applause from hundreds of supporters, declared a victory of sorts over the Bush administration.

What is disgusting is that this "victory over the Bush administration" comes despite the fact that the judge acknowledged that Stewart's offense was reat, severe, and potentially lethal.

n fact, Koeltl made it clear that Stewart had committed a serious offense by smuggling messages between her client, Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, and his followers in the Middle East, including a statement withdrawing the sheik's support for a cease-fire with the Egyptian government. Stewart's actions, Koeltl said, constituted "extraordinarily severe criminal conduct" and material support for terrorism, and could have had "lethal consequences."

Koeltl noted, however, that neither Stewart's actions nor those of her co-defendants, translator Mohammed Yousry and Rahman aide Ahmed Abdel Sattar, resulted in violence in the United States or overseas.

It seems, though, that the judge in this case was a fan of her prior legal work, and allowed his admiration for her previous public service to be the basis for this absurdly low sentence -- and therefore wildly departed from federal sentencing guidelines.

Stewart should have spent the remainder of her life rotting in prison. Instead, the judge sent a message that terrorists and their associates who act out of what are perceived as noble motives can expect leniency.

And you wonder why many of us have argued against treating terrorism as a criminal matter and not a military one. Judge Koeltl proves that the courts are ill-equipped to handle such matters.

Posted by: Greg at 10:27 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 390 words, total size 3 kb.

This little tidbit, commented upon by Stop the ACLU and Jawa Report, is utterly stunning

Emadeddin Z. Muntasser and Muhammed Mubayyid face charges in U.S. District Court of Massachusetts for the soliciting and expenditure "of funds to support and promote the mujahideen and jihad, including the distribution of pro-jihad publications." Their Care International "charity," a now-defunct Boston-based al Qaeda front organization, published, among other things, the English version by al Qaeda co-founder Abdullah Azzam of "Join the Caravan," which states: "he obligation of Jihad today remains [individually required] until the last piece of land, which was in the hand of the Muslims, but has been occupied by disbelievers, is liberated."

In their Oct. 5 request for a dismissal, the defendants effectively -- and unwittingly -- explain all the reasons why the federal government should outlaw Islamic charitable giving in the United States.

In their motion, attorneys Mrs. Estrich, Malick Ghachem, Norman Zalkind and Elizabeth Lunt, argue that the defendants merely exercised their religious freedom and obligation to give "zakat" (Islamic charity).

Their motion cites Chapter 9, verse 60 of the Koran, which describes "those entitled to receive zakat." According to the definition of zakat in The Encyclopedia of Islam, "category 7" of eligible recipients are "volunteers engaged in jihad" for whom the zakat cover "living expenses and the expenses of their military service (animals, weapons)."

In other words, faithfully practicing Islam mandates the funding of terrorist activities -- and funds given in support of jihadi terrorism should be tax-deductable!

We Americans keep being told that jihadi terrorism is not a true face of Islam, that Islam is a religion of peace and that terrorist activites are contrary to its teachings. We are frequently told that jihad is an internal struggle and not the spreading of Islamic hegemony by the sword. yet the argument presented in federal court by distinguished lawyers -- law professors, the campaign manager for a former Democrat nominee for president, and the former head of a state ACLU chapter -- are arguing precisely the opposite as they seek the dismissal of the charges against individuals who have aided and abetted terrorism.

I'm not sure which is more shocking -- that these "respectable" folks are explicitly siding with jihadi terrorism against the United States, or that they are arguing that the United States Constitution protects jihadi terrorism against interference by the United Staes government.

Oh, and this is one more reason to vote Republican -- the ACLU is an actively partisan group that favors teh Democrats, and Estrich is a likely judicial nominee in any future Democrat presidential administration.

MORE AT: Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler, Ace of Spades, Texas Hold 'Em, Dread Pundit Bluto.

Posted by: Greg at 01:48 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 460 words, total size 4 kb.

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The Washington Post raises interesting questions about who would become speaker -- and potentially president in the unlikely deaths of both President Bush and Vice President Cheney -- under a secret list of individuals as "Speaker Pro Tem".

But that is not the interesting part to me.

Perhaps the biggest question, some lawyers say, is whether a House speaker -- full time or pro tempore -- can assume and keep the presidency under any circumstance. A statute, not the Constitution, lists the speaker's place in the line succession.

A case can be made that no one in Congress qualifies as an "officer" eligible to assume the presidency under Article II of the Constitution, said Neil Kinkopf, a professor of law at Georgia State University. The question may never be settled, he said, because the Supreme Court would take it up only if a speaker became president and someone challenged the action in court.

My guess? This would constitute a political question with which the courts would be unlikely to involve themselves. And given that speaker (and President Pro Tem of the Senate) are boh constitutionally ordained offices, I'd have to argue that they do qualify as "officers" for purposes of the succession.

But if they don't, would any individual occupying a statutorily created position as a cainet secretary qualify?

Posted by: Greg at 01:41 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 1 kb.

Fifty are dead as the Tamil Tigers attack a Sri Lankan Navy convoy.

t least 50 Sri Lankan navy sailors were feared killed when an explosives-laden truck driven by a suspected Tamil Tiger rebel rammed into their convoy in a north-central district on Monday, a military official said.

``There were about 15 buses and 13 were damaged in the explosion. About 50 bodies have been taken to hospital,'' a navy official in Colombo, who did not want to be identified, told Reuters.

One more group that needs to be dealth with by the world. Terrorists are like pirates -- the enemy of all mankind.

Posted by: Greg at 10:33 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 114 words, total size 1 kb.

That the power of taxing by the States may be exercised so as to destroy it, is too obvious to be denied. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

That principle is a cardinal part of our nation's constitutional jurisprudence. And Yet, the NY Times would set it aside in the case of religion, and with it the First Amendment rights of Americans.

Religious institutions should be protected from excessive intrusion by government. Judges should not tell churches who they have to hire as ministers, or meddle in doctrinal disputes. But under pressure from politically influential religious groups, Congress, the White House, and federal and state courts have expanded this principle beyond all reason. It is increasingly being applied to people, buildings and programs only tangentially related to religion.

In its expanded form, this principle amounts to an enormous subsidy for religion, in some cases violating the establishment clause of the First Amendment. It also undermines core American values, like the right to be free from job discrimination. It puts secular entrepreneurs at an unfair competitive disadvantage. And it deprives states and localities of much-needed tax revenues, putting a heavier burden on ordinary taxpayers.

Like most special-interest handouts, these privileges exist in large part because the majority is not aware, or is not being heard. With property taxes growing ever more burdensome, it is likely that localities will start to give religious exemptions closer scrutiny. People who care about discrimination-free workplaces, the right to unionize and childrenÂ’s safety should also start to push back.

Indeed, the NY Tmes akes a specific call for taxation of xhurcxhes, a much learer and much more substantial threat to the First Amendment than the exemptions it complains of could ever be. After all, who is going to determine what is essential to the free exercise of religion or cetral to a church's religious mission -- the church or the government? The authors of the editorial would support an entanglement of religion and government that they would never accept if we were talking about, for example, giving vouchers to allow shchool choice.

And more to the point, in every case that the NY Times raises a question regarding exemptions from taxation or regulation of religious institutions, it fails to ask a question that I think would be central to the issue if one does not believe in virtually unlimited government power -- is it the burden of taxation and regulation imposed upon society that is onerous, and not the exemptions permitted to those who do the work of God? Are the rest of us too oppressed by government, rather than religious institutions too free?

Posted by: Greg at 10:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 456 words, total size 3 kb.

IF YOU USE A ONETOUCH METER FOR GLUCOSE MONITORING, YOU MUST READ THE INFORMATION BELOW. YOUR HEALTH MAY DEPEND UPON IT!

The government warned diabetics to watch for counterfeit versions of test strips used to monitor blood sugar levels. The strips, for use in glucose monitors made by a Johnson & Johnson company, were distributed nationwide, the Food and Drug Administration said. The strips are for use with various models of LifeScan Inc.Â’s OneTouch brand of blood glucose monitors. LifeScan is part Johnson & Johnson. Diabetics who bought the strips should stop using them, replace them and call a doctor, the F.D.A. said. The counterfeits are: OneTouch Basic/Profile, lot numbers 272894A, 2619932 and 2606340. The 50-count packages are labeled in English and French; and OneTouch Ultra, lot number 2691191. The 50-count packages are labeled in English, Greek and Portuguese.

I'd like to commend the New York Times for putting this story on its front page with the health news. While I wish it were higher up on the page, it is the only place I have seen this news about this important issue involving the sort of meter I currently use (no, I don't have the fake strips).

Posted by: Greg at 05:59 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 220 words, total size 2 kb.

I'd like to applaud the American Federation of Teachers for opposing this anti-Semitic move by an Irish educator's organization.

he American Federation of Teachers (AFT) is calling on Irish academics to oppose demands to boycott Israel. The union, which represents 1.3 million members across the US, sent a letter to four Irish teachers and academics unions, urging them to oppose the boycott which has been proposed by several Irish academics in recent weeks.

"Boycotts of this nature only help those who wish to curtail the academic freedom faculty members hold dear," wrote Edward J. McElroy, president of the American Federation of Teachers in the letter to his Irish colleagues.

The American union also notes that the Irish academics' singling out faculty members from Israel, which is a democratic country, while ignoring those from other countries "raises more questions than it answers."

The boycott call voiced by 61 Irish faculty members in a letter sent to the Irish Times in late September. They called for the EU to cut ties with Israeli academic institutions in protest of Israel's policy towards the Palestinians and its conduct during the Lebanese war.

Yep, they only oppose democratic Israel -- not dictatorships rife with human rights violations like Cuba, North Korea, or Libya. Only Jew-hatred can explain such a move. And while I am not a member of the AFT (indeed, I am a building representative for another teacher's organization), I wholeheartedly endorse their position.

Posted by: Greg at 02:00 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 252 words, total size 2 kb.

Do you doubt me? The look at this.

Mr. Bush ignored that fact after 9/11, when he tried to put the prisoners of the war on terror beyond the reach of American law and the Geneva Conventions.

If these folks are really prisoners of war, they are then not entitled to any trial. Indeed, trying them at all is a violation of the Geneva Convention. Furthermore, it would be within the province of the President to order them held until the conflict is ended by treaty or victory. Given that the War on Terror will last for many years (possibley beyond our lifetimes), the NY Times has conceded that the captured terrorist may be detained for life without any trial whatsoever.

Posted by: Greg at 10:01 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.

Hey, I figure I should just come out and say it. After all, that seems to be the signal being given by yet another extension of federal housing benefits to those living in Houston more than a year after their city was devastated by the hurricane and subsequent collapse of the levees.

Houston social service agencies and Hurricane Katrina victims living in the city welcomed a decision by Federal Emergency Management Agency officials to extend housing subsidies past an Oct. 31 deadline for recertification for at least another four months. The specter of thousands of jobless people being thrown out of their apartments onto the streets still remains, but the FEMA action provides a window of opportunity to prevent that from happening.

The federal disaster relief agency dropped its requirement for extensive documentation for housing assistance recertification after few of the estimated 21,000 evacuee households in Houston made submissions. Instead, a simple one-page form is being accepted, with an automatic extension of all housing payments through the end of February.

Here we are, over a year later, and these folks still are not working and pulling their own weight. Indeed, the only substantive contribution they have made to the Houston community is their impact upon the crime rate, which has skyrocketed since September 2005. And for all Mayor White and others say that 18 months is the upper limit for FEMA assistance of this sort, I've no doubt that come the first of the year we will be hearing the Katrina sob stories again. After all, I've got some Katrina kids, here for a year, still trying to use the hurricane to explain why they don't have basic school supplies. They don't have because they don't bother -- and that explains the housing and employment situation for many of these folks.

Enough is enough -- either cut off the asistance or concede teh reality that we will be supporting these folks and their descendents until the end of time.

Posted by: Greg at 07:25 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 349 words, total size 2 kb.

I won't be buying the newest operating system from Microsoft -- and will likey get a Linux machine if these licensing terms remain in place.

From the Houston Chronicle's TechBlog:

Earlier this week, Microsoft released the license terms for the various versions of Windows Vista. As is always the case with a new operating system, there are some terms that weren't present with Windows XP.

One of them has caused a firestorm among computer enthusiasts who build their own machines and/or frequently upgrade hardware. As Ed Bott writes, Vista now limits the number of times you transfer the operating system from an old machine to a new one.

Specifically, you can transfer your Vista license once. That means if you install Vista onto a new PC, you must remove it from the old one. And you may only perform that maneuver once.

In addition, making enough changes to key components in a PC will constitute transferring the license, effectively creating a new PC.

I spoke with Shanen Boettcher, the general manager of product management for Windows Vista, who confirmed those scenarios. Those used to being able to use the same copy of Windows XP on multiple machines -- so long as the same copy isn't being used on more than one at a time -- will be out of luck after that first transfer.

Boettcher said this change was made to clarify that "Windows is licensed on a per copy, per device basis."

Of course, Windows' current activation process pretty much assures that. With XP, you're not able to have the operating system running on more than one device -- Microsoft's activation servers will block XP, and you'll be forced to call an 800 number to explain yourself.

Boettcher said that, as with Windows XP, an algorithm in Vista is used to determine the hardware fingerprint of a system. Change enough of the fingerprint, and the system is considered a new PC. Two things that are sure to trigger that, Boettcher said, is replacing the hard drive and/or the motherboard.

Those may not be things most users do every day... but they are not unusual things, either.

So what does that mean? You are paying more for the latest software, but have even fewer rights under the license than you did before. Indeed, not only are you limited in how many times you can transfer the software from machine to machine as you upgrade to meet your technology needs, even hardware upgrades on the same machine may be enough to qualify as that single transfer that you are permitted. In other words, simply installing a new hard drive after one crashes (a choice I considered this spring when mine failed) constitutes a transfer of the software, even though you continue to use what is, effectively, the same machine!

Frankly, I'm tired of Microsoft's BS games with consumers. Monopoly power chas led to teh screwing of the consumer with this latest OS. How long until XP is no longer supported, and new machine purchasers find themselves coerced into buying machines with the new licensing agreement.

Here's hoping that the consumers say no -- and that computer manufacturers start saying no to Microsoft Vista.

H/T: By The Bayou

Posted by: Greg at 02:15 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 548 words, total size 4 kb.

It is generally accepted history that the Spaniards and other Europeans brought diseases with them that killed off the indigenous people of the Americas. There is certainly some truth to that in some areas of the New World -- but it may not be the case in Mexico, which is usually cited as Exhibit A for the "foreign diseases" argument.

Here's what history tells us about the Spanish conquest of Mexico: Armed with modern weapons and Old World diseases, several hundred Spanish soldiers toppled the Aztec empire in 1521. And by the end of the century, the invaders' guns, steel and germs had wiped out 90 percent of the natives.

It's a key piece of the "Black Legend," the tales of atrocities committed by the Spanish Inquisition and colonizers of the New World.

But it may be just that — legend, according to Rodolfo Acuña-Soto, a Harvard-trained epidemiologist.

He argues that an unknown indigenous hemorrhagic fever may have killed the bulk of Mexico's native population, which plummeted from an estimated 22 million in 1519, when the Spaniards arrived, to 2 million in 1600.

And he warns that the fever — which the Aztecs called cocoliztli in their Nahuatl language — may still be lurking in remote rural areas of Mexico.

Not everyone buys the theory. But Acuña-Soto, who spent 12 years poring over colonial archives, census data, graveyard records and autopsy reports, is convinced that many historians are wrong about what killed the Aztecs.

"The problem with history is that it's very ideological," he said. "In this case, it was a beautiful way of accusing the Spaniards of unimaginable cruelties and of decimating the population of Mexico."

Spanish colonizers were far from blameless, he quickly points out. By subjecting the Indians to slave-like conditions and malnutrition, they made them more vulnerable to the disease, he said.

"Of course, there's a terrible story of cruelty and disease that killed a huge amount of indigenous people," he said. "But we don't know what this disease was."

Acuña-Soto, who has published his findings in several international scholarly journals, is a research professor at Mexico's National Autonomous University.

Notice, this doesn't absolve teh Spanish of charges of great cruelty. But it does raise the possibility that something else was at work -- and that the agent of infection is still around. I ca't wait to se what further research shows.

Posted by: Greg at 04:41 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 422 words, total size 3 kb.

Maybe, maybe not. The availability of a defibrilator may not have made a difference. But wouldn't you think that every coach (those most likely to need it) would have a key to gain access to the equipment?

Katy school district officials acknowledged Friday that two coaches did not have keys to unlock a room where an automated external defibrillator was stored, 25 feet from the track where 16-year-old Jhonathan Bruda collapsed and died last week.

District officials originally told the Houston Chronicle that both track coaches — Ryan Ratcliff and Amy Pitzel had keys to the trainer's room on the morning of Oct. 6. They said Friday that police reports and witness statements won't be released now because of an ongoing investigation.

"We thought all the coaches had keys but now we know that's not true," said Steve Stanford, a spokesman for Katy Independent School District. ''Neither coach had a key."

This was just one of the discrepancies in the accounts the district gave this week about how coaches responded to Bruda, a Taylor High School cross-country team member who collapsed after a light workout.

Stanford also acknowledged Friday that a 911 dispatcher did, in fact, ask Pitzel if she had access to an AED. According to Stanford, Pitzel responded, "Yes, but I can't get to it."

Pitzel was relaying information to Ratcliff as he performed CPR on Bruda, Stanford said.

I'm not surprised by the discrepancies between the original account and the current one. It is only about two weeks since we had a 12-year-old collapse and die during football practice at one of the middle schools that feeds into my high school. The initial statements of the district and the later ones contained some differences that can best be ascribed to the rush to supply information in a timely fashion vs. the desire to to transparantly release all facts. None of the changes impacted teh basic narrative, though.

I am shocked, however, by the discovery that coaches didn't have a key to the defibrilator. I'm willing to bet that it will come out that only the "big sport" coaches have them. It is typical that minor sport coaches are disregarded in that fashion. Let's just hope that it didn't cost a boy his life.

Posted by: Greg at 04:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 390 words, total size 2 kb.

And we've been repeatedly assured by Muslim groups that the government's actions with regard to that Islamic "charity" were unfounded and a case of post-9/11 Islamophobia.

But now we have a guilty plea to confirm that the organization was supporting terrorists.

The imam of a northern Georgia mosque pleaded guilty to providing material support to the militant group Hamas in a case in which the agreement, charges and even the plea hearing were handled in secret.

The U.S. attorney's office said Friday that the charges and plea agreement involving Mohamed Shorbagi were filed Aug. 28 in federal court in Rome, Ga., a division of Atlanta's federal court, but were sealed until Friday.

Shorbagi, 42, agreed to a maximum of 15 years in prison, prosecutors said. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for Nov. 3.

According to prosecutors, between 1997 and 2001, Shorbagi provided financial support to Hamas, a group designated by the United States as a foreign terrorist organization. He also was accused of conspiring with unnamed others to provide material support to Hamas.

The donations were passed through the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, prosecutors said.

"It was not for a large amount of money," U.S. Attorney David Nahmias said. "But that goes to show you it doesn't take a large amount of money to get 15 years in prison."

What did Imam Shorbagi and the Holy Land Foundation do to support terrorism?

Nahmias's office said Shorbagi was a Georgia representative of the Holy Land Foundation and knew money provided to the foundation was actually funneled to Hamas.

He had attended Holy Land Foundation meetings at which high-level Hamas officials made presentations condemning Israel, and had hosted high-level Hamas officials at the Rome mosque where he served as imam, prosecutors said.

So it appears that there was more than charity work going on out of the offices of the Holy Land Foundation (a name intended to trick American Christians into giving money to support Muslim terrorism against Israel and the US), and more than religious activities going on at the mosque. Is it any wonder, then, that many of us believe that the FBI should be monitoring mosques and other Muslim organizations for ties to terrorists as we continue the Crusade Against Jihadism?

Of course, the usual suspects are up in arms over the fact that their fellow jihadi Islamists have been investigated, charged, and in this case determined to be guilty of support for terrorism.

“The facts of these cases are never actually released,” said Rabiah Ahmed, a spokeswoman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, based in Washington. “There’s no public scrutiny except what the government chooses to release. The perception is that they’re being heavy-handed and the Muslim community is being unfairly targeted.”

The reality is that Imam Shorbagi could have had a trial in open court in which his crimes and those of the Holy Land Foundation would have been laid out for all to see. Instead he cut a deal to save his own skin, tuning on his fellow jihadi-wannabes. There will be plenty of time for all the evidence to be laid out in court when the principals of the Holy Land Foundation are put on trial. And by the way -- I can't wait for charges to be filed against CAIR, which I understand has its own Hamas connections.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Conservative Cat, Blue Star Chronicles, Samantha Burns, Pirate's Cove, Bullwinkle Blog, Stuck on Stupid, Adam's Blog, Third World County, Clash of Civilizations, Right Nation, Is It just Me?, Uncooperative Blogger, Stop the ACLU, The World According to Carl, Church & State, Amboy Times, Woman Honor Thyself, Jo's Cafe

Posted by: Greg at 04:03 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 622 words, total size 5 kb.

This news just breaking.

Former U.S. Rep. Gerry Studds, the first openly gay person elected to Congress, died early Saturday at Boston Medical Center, several days after he collapsed while walking his dog, his husband said.

Studds fell unconscious Oct. 3 because of what doctors later determined was a blood clot in his lung, Dean Hara said.

Studds regained consciousness, remained in the hospital, and seemed to be improving. He was scheduled to be transferred to a rehabilitation center, but his condition deteriorated Friday and he died at about 1:30 a.m. Saturday, Hara said.

My sympathies extend to his survivors. May they be comforted in this time of loss.

Of course, i don't write about every deceased former member of Congress. But it is quite appropriate to do so, given what he is best known for and its relationship to certain current events in Washington.

Gerry Studds had sex with one page and made inappropriate advances on two others. he admitted it. he refused to apologize for it. he turned his back on the House of representatives and rejected the censure vote of his fellow members over it. And he stayed in Congress, reelected with the full support of the Democrat leadership of the House and the Democrat Party, serving six additional terms until he retired after the 1996 elections. He was even given a committee chairmanship and was honored by having a National Marine Sanctuary named after him. So much for concern about the safety of pages by the Democrats, who now hypocritically object to the creepy words and dirty talk of disgraced former Congressman Mark Foley and the failure of the GOP leadership of the House to psycically know about IMs that no one showed them.

UPDATE: The guys over at GayPatriot have a great piece on Studds -- and note these two quotes upon his passing.

“Gerry’s leadership changed Massachusetts forever and we’ll never forget him. His work on behalf of our fishing industry and the protection of our waters has guided the fishing industry into the future and ensured that generations to come will have the opportunity to love and learn from the sea. He was a steward of the oceans.”

- U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.

—

“No one fought harder for human rights, particularly in Latin America; for our environment; and for the fishermen of New England and the entire nation. He was a true pioneer.”

- U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., whose wife, Lisa, once worked as an aide to Studds.

In other words, even in the midst of the Mark "Talk Dirty To Me" Foley scandal, Democrats find it impossible to condemn a Democrat ex-congressman who actually did have sex with a page. Incredible!

Oh, and there are two other quotes that they left out of their piece hat I feel need to be included.

"Gerry was a stalwart champion of New England's fishing families as well as a committed environmentalist who worked hard to demonstrate that the cause of working people and the cause of the environment go hand in hand with the right leadership. When he retired from Congress, he did not retire from the cause, continuing to fight for the fishing industry and New England's environmental causes.

- U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.

---

"I am very saddened by the death of Gerry Studds. From his days in the early 1970s as an articulate and effective opponent of the Vietnam war, through his consistent leadership on environmental issues, to his insistence that the U.S. government stop ignoring the AIDS crisis, Gerry was a forceful advocate for causes that were not always popular and that were consequently shunned by many politicians."

- U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.

Leading Democrats all. I guess its not what you do, its how you vote that counts. After all, its for the children -- and Gerry Studds was all about children.

I bet that Mark Foley gets no such eulogies on his death -- but then again, his party didn't run him for reelection a half dozen times after he was exposed, either.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Conservative Cat, Blue Star Chronicles, Samantha Burns, Pirate's Cove, Bullwinkle Blog, Stuck on Stupid, Adam's Blog, Third World County, Clash of Civilizations, Right Nation, Is It just Me?, Uncooperative Blogger, Stop the ACLU, The World According to Carl, Church & State, Amboy Times, Woman Honor Thyself, Jo's Cafe

Posted by: Greg at 03:21 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 757 words, total size 6 kb.

I'm disgusted that Bob Ney did not resign upon entering a guilty plea on bribery charges -- indeed, I believed he should have resigned when he announced the deal some weeks ago. I'm shocked that the prosecutors did not mandate he do so immediately as a condition of his plea deal. Those who take bribes have no place in Congress -- or any other public office.

Representative Bob Ney, the first member of Congress to confess to crimes in dealings with the lobbyist Jack Abramoff, pleaded guilty to corruption charges Friday but said he would not immediately resign.

Mr. Ney, Republican of Ohio, announced last month that he intended to plead guilty, admitting that in return for official acts, he had accepted tens of thousands of dollarsÂ’ worth of gifts from Mr. Abramoff that included lavish trips, meals and tickets to concerts and sporting events. He faces a prison term of more than two years.

But what had not been expected at FridayÂ’s court hearing was Mr. NeyÂ’s disclosure that he intended to remain in Congress for now. The announcement appeared to surprise and infuriate House Republican leaders, who are trying to tamp down other scandals that are threatening to damage the party in next monthÂ’s Congressional elections.

After learning that Mr. Ney would not step down immediately and would continue to draw his $165,200-a-year salary, Speaker J. Dennis Hastert and other Republican leaders said they would move to expel him as soon as Congress returns next month for a postelection session.

“Bob Ney must be punished for the criminal actions he has acknowledged,” they said in a statement. “He betrayed his oath of office and violated the trust of those he represented in the House. There is no place for him in this Congress.”

The White House joined in calling for Mr. Ney to resign immediately. “What Congressman Ney did is not a reflection of the Republican Party,” said Tony Snow, the White House spokesman. “It’s a reflection of Congressman Ney, and he ought to step down.”

I'm heartened by the GOP moves to rid themselves of this criminal -- though I am disturbed that they were willing to wait until after the plea to expel their corrupt colleague. After all, his admission of guilt should have been sufficent to trigger an expulsion vote.

By the way, I knew Jack Abramoff way back when -- a one of several members heads of the national College Republicans I've had the opportunity to know (one, Tony Zagotta, was a good friend back during our days at Illinois State). That association makes me more disgusted, rather than less, by the misdeeds we are learning of as this investigation unfolds, and makes me more desirous of seing all involved severely and justly punished.

Posted by: Greg at 03:11 AM | Comments (88) | Add Comment
Post contains 466 words, total size 3 kb.

This could change our whole picture of the emergence of human civilization.

The remains of what has been described as a huge lost city may force historians and archaeologists to radically reconsider their view of ancient human history.

Marine scientists say archaeological remains discovered 36 metres (120 feet) underwater in the Gulf of Cambay off the western coast of India could be over 9,000 years old.

The vast city - which is five miles long and two miles wide - is believed to predate the oldest known remains in the subcontinent by more than 5,000 years.

The site was discovered by chance last year by oceanographers from India's National Institute of Ocean Technology conducting a survey of pollution.

Using sidescan sonar - which sends a beam of sound waves down to the bottom of the ocean they identified huge geometrical structures at a depth of 120ft.

Debris recovered from the site - including construction material, pottery, sections of walls, beads, sculpture and human bones and teeth has been carbon dated and found to be nearly 9,500 years old.

Read the whole article -- it is fascinating.

Posted by: Greg at 12:52 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

Let me begin by noting that I just love the headline for this news story from the Sacramento Bee – it is so marvelously and subtly misleading.

U.S. agents question teen

Girl ran anti-Bush page on MySpace

Those fascists! How dare they harass this poor child for exercising her First Amendment rights.

Only if you read the story do you find it is more than an “anti-Bush” site.

The latest Sacramento resident to be questioned by federal agents in possible threats against President Bush is a 14-year-old girl with a heart on her backpack and braces on her teeth, a freckle-nosed adolescent who is passionate about liberal politics and cute movie stars.

Her name is Julia Wilson, and she learned a vivid civics lesson Wednesday when two Secret Service agents pulled her out of biology class at McClatchy High School to ask about comments and images she posted on MySpace.

Beneath the words "Kill Bush," Julia posted a cartoonish photo-collage of a knife stabbing the hand of the president. It was one of a few images Julia said she used to decorate an anti-Bush Web page she moderated on MySpace, the social networking Web site that is hugely popular among teenagers.

Yes, you read that right – “Kill Bush”. A graphic of a knife stabbing the president. Sounds like a possible threat that needs to be checked out, and possibly a violation of federal law. Certainly more than merely an “anti-Bush” site.

This brainless child’s parents are very upset – but not at their daughter. No, they upset that the Secret Service would DARE question her baby – especially without one of them present.

Federal law prohibits making serious threats against the president, and Julia and her parents say what she did was wrong.

The couple are disturbed, however, that federal agents questioned a child at school -- without her parents present. And First Amendment lawyers question whether the Secret Service over-reacted to a 14-year-old's comments on a Web site made for casual socializing.

"I don't condone what she did, but it seems a little over the top to me," said Julia's father, Jim Moose. "You'd think they could look at the situation and determine that she's not a credible threat."

Actually, you fool, they donÂ’t know what the situation is until they investigate. Suppose that, instead of an ill-informed little brat raised by overly-indulgent parents, the site was operated by a nascent Dylan Klebold or Eric Harris? No one took them seriously before they attacked their high school and murdered 13 people. How was the Secret Service to know that your daughter wasnÂ’t a mentally and morally disturbed sociopath? What is over the top, sir, is that you think they should NOT have pursued the matter as they did.

Here is how Julia Wilson's family tells their story:

Two Secret Service agents arrived at their Land Park home about 2:30 Wednesday afternoon, Kirstie Wilson said. They told her they wanted to speak with her daughter about threats to the president that she had posted on MySpace.

"She was in molecular biology, and I said I really didn't want to take her out of class for this," Kirstie Wilson said. "I said I'd make sure she came right home from school."

She asked the agents to come back in an hour, and they left.

Then Wilson sent her daughter a text message instructing her to come straight home from school.

"... there are two men from the secret service that want to talk with you. Apparently you made some death threats against president bush. Dont worry youre not going to jail or anything like that but they take these things very seriously these days," Kirstie Wilson wrote.

"Are you serious!?!? omg. Am I in a lot of trouble"? her daughter replied, using common teenage shorthand for "Oh, my God."

Kirstie Wilson called her husband. While they were on the phone, she received another text message from her daughter: "They took me out of class."

I guess that the Wilson family believes that law enforcement should schedule their appointments with potential assassins at the convenience of them and their families – you know, just to allow them to gather up their weapons of choice and go underground until they can do commit their murder.

And one more thing about this case, Mom and Dad were completely unaware of what their child was doing on the internet. They are lucky that all she lured out of the woodwork was a pair of nice Secret Service agents wanting to question her about her potentially criminal activity. They are lucky that she wasnÂ’t abused or abducted, or lured to the Middle East for a child marriage and conversion to Islam. Rather than bitching, they should hit their knees that they were spared any of those true horrors.

By the way, this was not an isolated incident for young Julia. She started the space last year calling it "People who want to stab Bush". Why MySpace didnÂ’t delete the account then for violating its terms of service is a mystery to me. She then changed it to "So Bush is an idiot but hey what else is new?", but left the graphic. It appears, though, that she never considered that her art work was also a potentially illegal act.

I think this stupid little child need to change the name of her group now. How about the title of this blog post -- “So Julia Wilson and her parents are idiots, but hey what else is new?”

UPDATE: I've run across several additional articles, and found a couple of quotes that make my blood boil.

The first couple are from Julia's over-indulgent, under-involved "parents".

"She obviously is not a threat to society, if you look at her age, her family background, the cartoonish nature of the MySpace page," said her father, Jim Moose, an environmental lawyer.

"She is just a typical teenage girl who made a mistake," said her mother during an interview at their neatly landscaped home.

First, Mommy Dearest, she is a girl who potentially committed a crime, not merely "a typical teenage girl who made a mistake". She deserved to be questioned. And Daddy Dearest, it is clear that you are a typical liberal hypocrite -- after all, your argument is that law enforcement should look and find out that this is a rich white little girl from a good home and therefore miraculously divined that she was no threat, because we all know that it is only "those people" (black, Hispanic, poor) who commit crimes.

Then there is this whine from the little anti-American felon-in-training herself.

Julia Wilson said the agents threatened her by saying she could be sent to juvenile hall for making the threat.

"They yelled at me a lot," she said. "They were unnecessarily mean."

In other words, they told you what could happen if you were charged as a juvenile. They didn't get you a double half-caf latte with extra milk before asking you any questions and they raised their voices, so you got your feelings hurt over that because Mommy and Daddy have told you that the universe revolves areound Uranus and you therefore don't have to accept the authority of anyone but yourself. Too bad they didn't cuff you and take you in for further questioning -- then maybe you would learn that your conduct was seriously wrong.

UPDATE 2: One more stupid comment from this self-centered little imbecile.

On Friday, the teenager said the agents' questioning led her to tears.

"I wasn't dangerous. I mean, look at what's (stenciled) on my backpack - it's a heart. I'm a very peace-loving person," said Wilson, an honor student who describes herself as politically passionate. "I'm against the war in Iraq. I'm not going to kill the president."

Four observations, you self-absorbed little brat:

1) John Wilkes Booth was a popular actor. He was pro-secession, and pro-slavery, but he would never try to kill the President.

2) Lee Harvey Oswald was a family man with a baby who was also a Communist. He'd never try to kill the President.

3) John Hinkley came from a good home in a nice neighborhood. he would never try to kill the President.

4) How many terrorists were "good Muslims" carrying a Koran? How many criminals are wearing hearts, crosses or other "nice" symbols when they are arrested -- or when they commit their crime?

UPDATE 3: Looks like the young lady is capable of learning and has some common sense after all. I dislike her politics, but support her next move.

And I'll post here my offer from the comments -- if Julia and/or her parents wish to comment here they are welcome, and if they wish to submit a piece for me to publish as a featured piece on this site I will be glad to host it. I'm willing to let them get out their side of teh story.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Conservative Cat, Blue Star Chronicles, Samantha Burns, Pirate's Cove, Bullwinkle Blog, Stuck on Stupid, Adam's Blog, Third World County, Clash of Civilizations, Right Nation, Is It just Me?, Uncooperative Blogger, Stop the ACLU, The World According to Carl, Church & State, Amboy Times, Woman Honor Thyself, Jo's Cafe

Posted by: Greg at 12:33 PM | Comments (208) | Add Comment
Post contains 1570 words, total size 11 kb.

John Murtha, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Abscam case, decided to bring the level of political dialog to his own level.

"Screw them," Rep. John Murtha said of Republicans in an email sent to the liberal political group MoveOn.org on Wednesday. The Pennsylvania Democrat, who is urging a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq, added that he needs its members' help to throw GOP congressmen "out of power -- as many of them as possible."

"A year ago when I presented my plan for Iraq, I did it to provide leadership and protect our troops," Murtha stated in his email. "The Republicans have spent their time name-calling while the situation for our troops in Iraq gets worse. They've tried to smear me, other veterans, Democrats, you and anybody who stands up to them.

"Well, let me say one thing right now: screw them," the 16-term congressman declared. "Those gravestones at Arlington cemetery don't say Democrat or Republican on them. We are all patriots.

I don’t believe you are a patriot. I don’t care how long you served or how many decorations you have – your desire to cut and run in the face of the enemy is a cowardly abrogation of the security of the United States.
And I think this presentation of your record, Congressman Murtha, bears that assertion out.

Also on Thursday, Larry Bailey, president of Vets for the Truth (VFTT) -- an organization working to "boot Murtha" from Congress on Nov. 7 -- agreed that the congressman's attitude in his email is something voters should consider.

Bailey told Cybercast News Service: "'Screw them' is what John Murtha has said for 32 years to:

• "Iraq War veterans, who have tried unsuccessfully to discuss that conflict with Murtha;

• "Honest citizens, who are berated, cursed and threatened by Murtha goons;

• "Taxpayers, who have to come up with the money for Murtha's self-serving appropriations 'earmarks;'

• "Troops in Iraq, who are unjustly characterized by Murtha for having 'killed innocent civilians in cold blood;'

• "Honest politicians, who object to the 'bully-boy' tactics employed by Murtha in getting his way; and

• "Anyone who dares to disagree with or vote against John Murtha.

"'Screw them' might well be the epitaph inscribed on Murtha's tombstone," Bailey stated.

So Congressman, your MoveOn.org fundraising communique leads me to respond in kind – Go screw yourself!

Posted by: Greg at 12:28 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 398 words, total size 3 kb.

John Murtha, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Abscam case, decided to bring the level of political dialog to his own level.

"Screw them," Rep. John Murtha said of Republicans in an email sent to the liberal political group MoveOn.org on Wednesday. The Pennsylvania Democrat, who is urging a U.S. military withdrawal from Iraq, added that he needs its members' help to throw GOP congressmen "out of power -- as many of them as possible."

"A year ago when I presented my plan for Iraq, I did it to provide leadership and protect our troops," Murtha stated in his email. "The Republicans have spent their time name-calling while the situation for our troops in Iraq gets worse. They've tried to smear me, other veterans, Democrats, you and anybody who stands up to them.

"Well, let me say one thing right now: screw them," the 16-term congressman declared. "Those gravestones at Arlington cemetery don't say Democrat or Republican on them. We are all patriots.

I don’t believe you are a patriot. I don’t care how long you served or how many decorations you have – your desire to cut and run in the face of the enemy is a cowardly abrogation of the security of the United States.
And I think this presentation of your record, Congressman Murtha, bears that assertion out.

Also on Thursday, Larry Bailey, president of Vets for the Truth (VFTT) -- an organization working to "boot Murtha" from Congress on Nov. 7 -- agreed that the congressman's attitude in his email is something voters should consider.

Bailey told Cybercast News Service: "'Screw them' is what John Murtha has said for 32 years to:

• "Iraq War veterans, who have tried unsuccessfully to discuss that conflict with Murtha;

• "Honest citizens, who are berated, cursed and threatened by Murtha goons;

• "Taxpayers, who have to come up with the money for Murtha's self-serving appropriations 'earmarks;'

• "Troops in Iraq, who are unjustly characterized by Murtha for having 'killed innocent civilians in cold blood;'

• "Honest politicians, who object to the 'bully-boy' tactics employed by Murtha in getting his way; and

• "Anyone who dares to disagree with or vote against John Murtha.

"'Screw them' might well be the epitaph inscribed on Murtha's tombstone," Bailey stated.

So Congressman, your MoveOn.org fundraising communique leads me to respond in kind – Go screw yourself!

Posted by: Greg at 12:28 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 3 kb.

I guess dirty talk is a much more serious issue than financial fraud that cost investors $2.4 million.

After investors sued a company whose new breast-cancer detector turned out to be ineffective, a firm partly owned by the Democrat fighting for Mark Foley's congressional seat stepped in.

Tim Mahoney's company, though, didn't side with the investors, who included a former deputy CIA director and a media empire heiress.

Instead, Mahoney's Boca Raton-based vFinance Inc. bought out the assets -- but not the liabilities -- of a deep-pocketed investment group that sold shares in the cancer-detector company. The plaintiffs said the purchase of Sterling Financial Investment Group's assets was a fraudulent effort to hide ill-gotten gains and will make it tougher for them to collect if they win the suit filed in December 2005 in federal court in Texas.

''At the very least, this was unethical. vFinance showed up at the party and took away the money that should be part of a judgment,'' said the plaintiffs' attorney, Mark Kincaid.

vFinance was recently added to the suit along with Sterling and the cancer-detector company DOBI. All deny wrongdoing and say investors knew the risks of speculating on the market. Through his campaign, Mahoney, vFinance's chairman who is not named in the suit, declined to comment and deferred questions to the company's attorney, Peter Ticktin.

This stripping of assets while leaving only liabilities seems to be a pattern among liberals. That is a big part of why Air America, which filed for bankruptcy today, was able to survive – once its creators ran up debt, they simply sold the assets and left those owed money holding the bag. Highly unethical – but seemingly an approved practice if you are on the left end of the political spectrum.

And one more reason to vote Republican.

Posted by: Greg at 12:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 312 words, total size 2 kb.

Yeah, it was a publicity stunt, but I think it indicates the fundamental lack of control we have of the border region, and the resulting lack of security.

Reports of an elephant crossing the river or people trying to smuggle an elephant across were rampant Tuesday while an elaborate political stunt was taking shape near the mouth of the Rio Grande.

It was a while later that the stunt, which was a photo shoot, was abruptly met by federal agents.

“The elephant never made landfall into Mexico, but I tell you something, he could have made 15 laps back and forth, but no one showed up,” said Raj Peter Bhakta, a former star on the NBC show “The Apprentice,” who also is a Republican candidate for the 13th District U.S. House of Representatives seat in Eastern Pennsylvania.

Three elephants, two African and an Asian, were taken out to a ranch near Boca Chica beach to perform, the 31-year-old Bhakta said.

He was in Brownsville to raise funds with friends and decided to get a first-hand look at border security while he was here, he said.

* * *

“If I can get an elephant led by a mariachi band into this country, I think Osama bin Laden could get across with all the weapons of mass destruction he could get into this country,” Bhakta said.

The only response from authorities was the arrival of the US Department of Agriculture, which seized the elephants because they were in a quarantine zone. The beasts wee released after they were sprayed for ticks.

Incredible!

Posted by: Greg at 12:25 PM | Comments (228) | Add Comment
Post contains 271 words, total size 2 kb.

News like this brings a smile to my face.

The Israel Air Force scored a direct hit on a car carrying a three-man terrorist cell Friday morning in northern Gaza. All three terrorists were eliminated.

The IDF reported that the cell was involved in many Kassam rocket attacks, including the five rockets fired at the Jewish town of Sderot on Thursday. The fifth rocket hit an electric power line in the evening, leaving the Jewish town in darkness. Power was gradually restored to the city over the next several hours.

The car carrying the terrorists was laden with Kassam rockets. The cell was on its way to launching them at Jewish targets when it was liquidated. Among the three dead is the commander of a northern Gaza branch of the Al-Kassam Brigades, Imad Al-Makusi, 32.

In a counter-terror aerial attack Thursday night, the IDF, targeted a weaponry manufacturing facility in Sajaiya, in southern Gaza. The weapons factory was located in the home of Ashraf Faruna, a senior Hamas terrorist. According to the IDF spokesman, Faruna was involved in numerous attacks as well as the manufacturing and distribution of weapons to terrorist cells. The PA claimed that several people were killed in the offensive; the IDF was unable to confirm or deny the claim.

The IDF spokesman noted that prior to the offensive, the IDF warned the population not to stay in structures that are used by terrorist organizations for storing weaponry. A statement from the IDF read: "Terrorist organizations operate from within civilian populations, while cynically exploiting uninvolved civilians and using them as human shields, exploiting their homes to store weaponry and launching rockets at Israeli towns from populated areas."

And just to clarify, Hamas has not changed its stripes, nor does it accept the right of Israel to engage in such defensive actions.

Hamas warned Israel that it would "painfully avenge" the recent deaths, and says it has "surprises" for Israel if the IDF tries to invade Gaza. "The enemy entangles itself when it merely infiltrates a few meters into Gaza," a Hamas spokesman said, "so what will happen if it infiltrates into all of the Gaza Strip?!"

Has the time come to exterminate the Hamasroaches?

Posted by: Greg at 12:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 391 words, total size 3 kb.