That is the charge made against Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) after they filed a Freedom of Information Act request on Wednesday.

A liberal government watchdog group has asked the Secret Service to release its records of prominent conservative Christian leaders' visits to the White House, but one of those leaders called the request "an act of Christianophobia."

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request on Wednesday. The group said in the request that the records are "likely to contribute to the public's understanding of the influence that conservative Christian leaders have, or attempt to have, on the president in the exercise of his authority."

The Secret Service has 20 business days to respond to the request for records pertaining to James Dobson of Focus on the Family, Gary Bauer of American Values, Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America, Louis Sheldon and Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition, Paul Weyrich of the Free Congress Foundation, Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, Don Wildmon of American Family Association, and Jerry Falwell of Liberty University.

"These are people that are publicly identifiable as leaders of what I would call the Christian right, and we are interested to know the extent of influence that they may have had on the president and his policies," Anne Weismann, chief counsel for CREW, told Cybercast News Service.

"It's one thing to know that people have influence and have support of the president, but I don't know that that answers the question about the degree to which they have access and influence to the president and his staff on a day-to-day basis," Weismann added.

I’m curious – what would the response be to a conservative group if it requested access to the records of the visit of prominent black leaders, Jewish leaders, Muslim leaders, homosexual leaders or other minority group leaders? I think the question answers itself – and clearly indicates the despicable nature of the request.

Posted by: Greg at 01:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 337 words, total size 2 kb.

The Mark Foley scandal is not about sexual orientation. It is about sexual deviancy and inappropriate exploitation of young people by a powerful politician. As such, I want to echo the comment of Ann Lowry, from her column published in the Star-Tribune.

The bottom line is that it does not matter that Mark Foley is gay.

Now I may disagree with her next conclusion (that the GOP leadership ignored evidence of a problem), but that statement is the one that really matters.

This is not a scandal about homosexuality – no matter how much a few on the Religious Right and many on the Homosexual Left want to turn it into an opportunity to purge Congress and of Republicans who are gay. The problem is that Foley is a sick freak with a serious psychological and moral problem who likely has broken laws and probably cannot be safely permitted to remain at large in society or on the Internet.

Posted by: Greg at 01:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.

Let’s hope this doesn’t give the NEA any ideas.

A teacher was hacked to death in this historic Mexican city that has been paralyzed for months by protests and violence, police said late Thursday. A colleague claimed the man was killed for opposing a teachers' strike.

Thousands of trade unionists and leftists have been camped out in Oaxaca since May, building barricades, taking over buildings and burning buses. The protesters are demanding the resignation of Oaxaca Gov. Ulises Ruiz, accusing him of rigging the 2004 election to win office and sending armed thugs against dissenters.

Victor Alonso Altamirano of the Oaxaca state police said teacher Jaime Rene Calva Aragon was on his way to a meeting Thursday evening when he was killed by two assailants wielding hefty ice picks.

Fellow teacher Alma Rosa Fernandez accused militant leftists of killing Calva for opposing a statewide teachers' strike that was a catalyst for the wider protests. Fernandez, who also opposes the strike, said the dissident teachers have been receiving death threats.

"We blame this murder directly on the radical teachers' wings," Fernandez said.

And lest you think this couldn’t happen here, consider the history of union violence in this country. Union opponents are regularly stalked, threatened and assaulted. When will union thugs recognize that the right to join a union and the right to strike can exist only insofar as there is the equally valid right to refuse to join a union and to refuse to strike? Until they do, unionism is not about freedom – it is merely about who gets to do the oppressing of the workers.

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 275 words, total size 2 kb.

LetÂ’s hope this doesnÂ’t give the NEA any ideas.

A teacher was hacked to death in this historic Mexican city that has been paralyzed for months by protests and violence, police said late Thursday. A colleague claimed the man was killed for opposing a teachers' strike.

Thousands of trade unionists and leftists have been camped out in Oaxaca since May, building barricades, taking over buildings and burning buses. The protesters are demanding the resignation of Oaxaca Gov. Ulises Ruiz, accusing him of rigging the 2004 election to win office and sending armed thugs against dissenters.

Victor Alonso Altamirano of the Oaxaca state police said teacher Jaime Rene Calva Aragon was on his way to a meeting Thursday evening when he was killed by two assailants wielding hefty ice picks.

Fellow teacher Alma Rosa Fernandez accused militant leftists of killing Calva for opposing a statewide teachers' strike that was a catalyst for the wider protests. Fernandez, who also opposes the strike, said the dissident teachers have been receiving death threats.

"We blame this murder directly on the radical teachers' wings," Fernandez said.

And lest you think this couldn’t happen here, consider the history of union violence in this country. Union opponents are regularly stalked, threatened and assaulted. When will union thugs recognize that the right to join a union and the right to strike can exist only insofar as there is the equally valid right to refuse to join a union and to refuse to strike? Until they do, unionism is not about freedom – it is merely about who gets to do the oppressing of the workers.

Posted by: Greg at 01:52 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 283 words, total size 2 kb.

Bt then again, why should anything different be expected of the party of slavery and segregation?

httpBlack business owners and religious leaders say there is an undercurrent of discontent with the Maryland Democratic Party's lack of black statewide candidates and think it will encourage support for Republicans -- especially Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele's run for the U.S. Senate.

"There's a lot of nervousness. You got a whole lot of black folks who are going to move towards Steele and possibly [Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.]," said Wayne Frazier, a black business leader in Baltimore and a supporter of Mr. Steele's opponent, Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin.

The Rev. Grainger Browning Jr., pastor of the 10,000 member Ebenezer A.M.E. Church in Fort Washington, said: "The Democratic Party does have a challenge now to show that it wants to make sure the African-American leadership is included in decision making."

The Baltimore Sun yesterday reported that Maryland's 10 black state senators met last week with Mr. Cardin and Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley, the Democratic nominee for governor, to register complaints that the party's top candidates for statewide office are white men.

The black senators, dubbed the "Committee of Ten," told Mr. Cardin and Mr. O'Malley, who are both white, that they are hearing about discontent among their constituents over the party's lack of diversity.

One participant complained that blacks get nothing but lip-service from the Democrats, despite the overwhelming loyalty of African-Americans to that party. This points up two things. First, because of their monolithic voting patterns, Democrats don’t need to even throw a sop to the black community because their votes are secure. Second, it demonstrates that too many blacks have bought into the myth that the GOP is racist, despite the fact that the Republicans do run minorities for major offices for substantive offices and reach out to the black community despite having their hand slapped away by black “leaders” who have been bought and paid for by the Democrats.

Posted by: Greg at 01:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.

Bt then again, why should anything different be expected of the party of slavery and segregation?

httpBlack business owners and religious leaders say there is an undercurrent of discontent with the Maryland Democratic Party's lack of black statewide candidates and think it will encourage support for Republicans -- especially Lt. Gov. Michael S. Steele's run for the U.S. Senate.

"There's a lot of nervousness. You got a whole lot of black folks who are going to move towards Steele and possibly [Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.]," said Wayne Frazier, a black business leader in Baltimore and a supporter of Mr. Steele's opponent, Rep. Benjamin L. Cardin.

The Rev. Grainger Browning Jr., pastor of the 10,000 member Ebenezer A.M.E. Church in Fort Washington, said: "The Democratic Party does have a challenge now to show that it wants to make sure the African-American leadership is included in decision making."

The Baltimore Sun yesterday reported that Maryland's 10 black state senators met last week with Mr. Cardin and Baltimore Mayor Martin O'Malley, the Democratic nominee for governor, to register complaints that the party's top candidates for statewide office are white men.

The black senators, dubbed the "Committee of Ten," told Mr. Cardin and Mr. O'Malley, who are both white, that they are hearing about discontent among their constituents over the party's lack of diversity.

One participant complained that blacks get nothing but lip-service from the Democrats, despite the overwhelming loyalty of African-Americans to that party. This points up two things. First, because of their monolithic voting patterns, Democrats don’t need to even throw a sop to the black community because their votes are secure. Second, it demonstrates that too many blacks have bought into the myth that the GOP is racist, despite the fact that the Republicans do run minorities for major offices for substantive offices and reach out to the black community despite having their hand slapped away by black “leaders” who have been bought and paid for by the Democrats.

Posted by: Greg at 01:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 343 words, total size 2 kb.

I think that Lt. Gov. Michael Steele has clearly articulated the record of Democrat racism and criminal activity in the Maryland Senate race.

October 4, 2006

Congressman Ben Cardin
Ben Cardin for Senate
22 Bloomsbury Avenue
Catonsville, Maryland 21228

Governor Howard Dean
Chairman, Democratic National Committee
430 South Capitol Street, SE
Washington, DC 20003

Senator Chuck Schumer
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
120 Maryland Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20002

Mr. Terry Lierman
Chairman, Maryland Democratic Party
188 Main Street, Suite 1
Annapolis, Maryland 21401

Dear Congressman Cardin, Governor Dean, Chairman Lierman and Senator Schumer:

For several months, I have been trailed by Democrat operatives filming my public events. At these events – speeches, press conferences, county fairs and parades – my every word and move has been recorded.

I realize this has become a part of modern campaigning and I welcome the scrutiny. In fact, I always make a point to say a friendly hello to whomever the Democrat Party sends to follow me. However, recent actions have crossed the line from political activity to an invasion of privacy.

On the morning of September 30, I participated in a homecoming ceremony for the Army National Guard 243rd Engineers. The event – as fitting for the occasion – was non-political. Republicans and Democrats joined together to welcome home brave men and women returning from Iraq and I attended in my official capacity to spend time with the troops and their families.

While speaking with two mothers whose sons had died in Iraq, I noticed the ever present Democrat operative filming our conversation. A conversation with parents who have lost a loved one in combat is private in nature and has no place in partisan politics, and certainly not in the smear campaign you have waged against me even before I entered the race for United States Senate. The filming of this conversation demonstrates a callous disregard for families who have lost a loved one and is an indefensible invasion of privacy.

Unfortunately, I have come to expect such ugly, gutter politics from you. Congressman Cardin, while saying you have expressed outrage to “all concerned parties” for the racist comments on your senior staffer’s blog, you have yet to apologize to me. Chairman Dean, your personal pollster, Cornell Belcher, advocated racist attacks to “knock” me down and “discredit” me, and yet I have received no apology from you. And, Senator Schumer, your staffers pled guilty to a crime when they stole my credit report and violated my privacy and that of my family, but I have had no apology from you either.

I did not think until this past Saturday, however, that such ugliness would intrude upon the return of our troops from Iraq. As I told your colleague, Congressman Steny Hoyer, who attended the event, this action represents a new low in Maryland politics and has no place in this campaign.

My campaign is focused on having a conversation with the voters of our state about the issues affecting Maryland and I am committed to building bridges over that which divides us. But, ugly partisan political tricks only work to divide our communities and represent the very type of political behavior voters are sick of.

If your respective organizations are as concerned as I am about the use of such poor judgment by your staff(s), you would take immediate steps to hold all responsible parties accountable.

I eagerly await your prompt response.

Sincerely,

MICHAEL S. STEELE

No apologies to the victim of illegal and racist activities and statements by Democrat political operatives. I guess that doing so would legitimize the right of a black man to stray off the Democrat plantation.

Mr. Cardin, Mr. Dean, Mr. Schummer -- do the right thing. Apologize PERSONALLY to Steele for the misdeeds you and your staffs have perpetrated.

Posted by: Greg at 10:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 645 words, total size 4 kb.

One would think that the former head of the FBI under Bill Clinton would be an acceptable selection to head up any investigation of the House Page Scandal. That isn't the case, though -- because he is an honest man and independent thinker on political matters. Who objects to his selection? The Democrats, especially Nancy Pelosi.

House Speaker Dennis Hastert said Thursday he is looking for a high-caliber figure to step in and fix flaws in the congressional page program that left the teenagers vulnerable to sexual advances.

Hastert was on the verge of naming former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who boasts a long, high-profile career in law enforcement, for the post. But the speaker held off because of objections from Democrats.

Hastert had called House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi on Thursday to notify her that he intended to hire Freeh to overhaul the program, their aides said. But Pelosi suggested it was too soon to make decisions about changing the program, and that Freeh might be the wrong man for the job.

“That's about public relations for the Republican leaders, it's not about protecting the children,” Pelosi, D-Calif., said in an interview with The Associated Press. “It smacks of 'blame the victim.'"

The possibility that Republican leaders covered up evidence that Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., was making inappropriate overtures to pages needs to be investigated first, before any changes in the program are considered, said Pelosi spokeswoman Jen Crider.

But Crider noted that Hastert, R-Ill., could name Freeh without Pelosi's support if he chose.

At his news conference Thursday about the House ethics committee's investigation of the page scandal, Hastert didn't cite any candidates for the job of overhauling the page program.

“We're looking for a person of high caliber to advise us on the page program,” he said at a news conference in Illinois. “I reached out to the Democrat leader and shared with her some of the ideas and we hope to resolve this soon.”

What are the real objections to Freeh?

Freeh urged Justice Department superiors to seek an independent counsel to investigate the 1996 presidential fundraising scandal, which focused largely on Democrats and the White House. The Justice Department turned him down.

After leaving office, Freeh was harshly critical of Clinton in his book, “My FBI.” He wrote that, during Clinton's presidency, “whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction.”

“His closets were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out,” said Freeh, who said he was preoccupied for eight years at the FBI with Clinton investigations, including Whitewater, 1996 presidential fundraising and the Monica Lewinsky affair.

In other words, there seems to be concern that Freeh might be an honest and impartial figure to head up the investigation, and that he might look under Democrat rocks to find misconduct or malfeasance. The Democrats are looking for political advantage -- the Republicans are looking to safeguard children.

Mr. Speaker, name Freeh to the post over teh objections of Nancy pelosi and the Democrats. It is the right thing to do.

Posted by: Greg at 10:19 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 525 words, total size 3 kb.

This from Pace University in New York City.

A paperback copy of the Koran was tossed into a toilet on the lower Manhattan campus of Pace University - the latest in a spate of bias incidents upsetting students and administrators at the college, officials said yesterday.

The NYPD Hate Crime Task Force is investigating the vandalism of the Koran, and the university's private security also is probing the incident, sources said.
"A Koran thrown into the toilet? I am hurt, not just as a Muslim but as a human being," said Zeina Berjaoui, 20, president of Pace's Muslim Student Association.

In the past two weeks, vandals also scrawled a swastika and .anti-black slurs on the same bathroom wall at Pace's campus near City Hall. Someone also sprayed the N-word onto a car parked at the school's Westchester County campus, cops and university sources said.

"One of our university's greatest strengths is its diversity," Pace President David Caputo wrote in a letter describing the incidents. "When speech is hurtful towards a class of people or incites violence, we must condemn it and take measures to stop it."

The copy of the Koran had been taken from the university .library before being defaced Sept. 21. It turned up in the toilet approximately two weeks ago. Today, cops will quiz the student who last withdrew the book, police sources said.

Well maybe there is a crime here – someone stole the book from the library.

But apart from the theft, how exactly does the act of placing a Koran in a toilet constitute any sort of crime? Indeed, is it not like flag burning, expressive conduct that communicates a point of view -- perhaps “Islam is a bunch of shit.” Would a Bible in a toilet elicit a similar response from the University? How about an American flag? An Israeli flag?

I find the statement that the university wishes to “take measures to stop” speech that is “hurtful to a class of people” particularly chilling. Does this mean that expression of the “wrong” views on abortion, homosexuality, religion, or race are prohibited at Pace University? Will speech that targets conservatives, Christians, Jews, or white people be stopped by the University, or will the offended students and faculty members be told that they need to butch up and accept the right of their antagonists to speak out? Just wondering – but pretty sure about the answer.

Posted by: Greg at 12:08 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 410 words, total size 3 kb.

I posted this last night, and want to give the flip side of the issue as prominent play as I gave the original arguments of Drudge and Passionate America.

For the past two days, a conservative blogger has ginned up publicity for his work outing a 21-year-old young man--a former congressional page and current deputy campaign manager for a heartland Republican congressman--who received sexually explicit instant messages from disgraced Florida GOP Rep. Mark Foley when he was 17 and 18 years old. I have received several e-mails from the blogger and readers flogging the post.

I refused to link to the blogger then and even though the Drudge Report has plastered screaming headlines about the blogger's scoop, I refuse to link to it now. There was absolutely no good reason to expose the former congressional page's name and identity. Seizing on ABC News' redaction failure and reporting errors (more on that in a moment) to play gotcha in a feeble attempt to avenge Foley is not a sufficient reason to obliterate the young man's privacy. The young man was the prey, not the predator.

Nobody is acting well here. ABC News seems to have made an honest error when it failed to completely redact the young man's AOL IM handle. That's how the conservative blogger traced the exposed man's identity. But in the wake of the Drudge pounding tonight, the news network surreptitiously edited its misreporting on the young man's age at the time of one of the IM exchanges without bothering to make clear it was a correction.

ABC's website now reads as follows.

ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys who began their exchanges with Foley at the age of 16 and 17, and continued through the age of 18.

That does change matters -- and indicates sloppy work by the ABC reporters and editors involved.

But even that still raises some of the legal issues noted in the MSNBC article I linked below -- while disgusting and repugnant, Foley's actions may well have been legal due to the requirement of state and federal laws that obscene communication be with someone under 16 amd the whole age of consent issue. These matters could impact the investigations in an interesting way -- and make the Gerry Studds comparison more pertinant, as he actually engaged in sex with a 17-year-old. Is talking dirty to a page really worse than sodomizing one?

Posted by: Greg at 10:38 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 439 words, total size 3 kb.

While the actions of former Rep. Mark Foley are beyond acceptable, it is possible that they were not criminal -- because he was engaged in an exchange with an 18-year-old adult!

A posting on ABCNEWS.COM of an unredacted instant message sessions between Rep. Mark Foley and a former congressional page has exposed the identity of the now 21 year-old accuser.

The website PASSIONATE AMERICA detailed the startling exposure late Wednesday.

ABCNEWS said in a statement: "We go to great lengths to prevent the names of alleged sex crime victims from being revealed. On Friday there was a very brief technical glitch on our site which was overridden immediately. It is possible that during that very brief interval a screen name could have been captured. Reviews of the site since then show no unredacted screen names."

SEX CHAT WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD

On Tuesday ABC news released a high-impact instant message exchange between Foley and, as ABC explained, a young man "under the age of 18."

ABC headlined the story: "New Foley Instant Messages; Had Internet Sex While Awaiting House Vote"

But upon reviewing the records, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, the young man was in fact over the age of 18 at the time of the exchange.

A network source explains, messages with the young man and disgraced former Congressman Foley took place before and after the 18th birthday.

Now Democrats and homosexual activists have for years claimed that Rep. Gerry Studd's sexual dalliances with a 17-year-old page were a private matter and acceptable because the boy was above the age of consent at the time. Should this young man prove to be an adult, will they now acknowledge that they would have been making an issue over LEGAL sexual activity by a homosexual -- and that they have been applying a different standard to a gay Republican than to gay Democrats?

Will ABC and Brian Ross admit that they have deceived the American public if the conversations were with an adult rather than a juvenile?

And will pigs sprout wings and fly round the Capitol Rotunda?

UPDATE: MSNBC has this piece on why thre may be no crime (or at least no prosecution) at all in the emails or IMs.

Investigators could consider federal obscenity laws, experts said, but the law prohibiting disseminating obscene material to children applies only to those under 16.

Benjamin Vernia, a former federal prosecutor specializing in such cases, compared Foley’s online conversations with pages to “grooming,” a law enforcement term for the way sexual predators bring along their underage victims. Grooming is a red flag for authorities, Vernia said, but it’s rarely enough to bring charges.

The question for federal investigators is whether FoleyÂ’s online chats ever led to real encounters. One chat transcript suggests Foley and a page had met in San Diego, but the chat doesnÂ’t indicate what took place.

Even if a sexual encounter occurred, however, that wonÂ’t necessarily be enough to lead to charges. It depends on how old the pages were at the time and what the age of consent was in that state.

If a state law was broken and authorities can show Foley used the Internet to facilitate it, that could trigger federal jurisdiction, experts said.

Foley is scum. That is beyond question. But he may not be a criminal -- and this may all be much ado about legal actions with individuals above the age of consent in their respective jurisdictions. This may highlight that the real difference between Democrats and Republicans is that we get rid of our perverts, while Democrats reelect them.

Posted by: Greg at 02:32 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 609 words, total size 4 kb.

In various conversations, I’ve had folks tell me that the Foley emails were sexual in nature. When I’ve stated they were not, I was accused of lying, of covering up, or of “parsing words.” But that simply is not the case. Let me reproduce for you the text of the emails that the GOP leadership, the press, and the FBI were aware of prior to last week.

HereÂ’s the second (the first is just confirming that the email address is correct).

glad your home safe and soundÂ… we donÂ’t go back into session until Sept 5Â…. si itÂ’s a nice long breakÂ…. I am back in Florida nowÂ… its nice hereÂ… been raining todayÂ… it sounds like you will have some fun over the next few weeksÂ…how old are you now?

In other words, just a chatty email. Except for that last question, I don’t see a thing that raises an eyebrow – and given the preexisting relationship between the two, it is not an outrageous question to ask in a breezy conversation.

The next email reads as follows.

I am in North CarolinaÂ…and it was 100 in New OrleansÂ…wow thatÂ’s really hotÂ… well do you miss DCÂ… Its raning here but 68 degrees so who can argueÂ… did you have fun at your conferenceÂ… what do you want for your birthday coming upÂ… what stuff do you like to do

Again, fairly innocuous stuff in a fairly breezy style – though since I don’t know the relevant dates I am unsure if the birthday is close to the time of the email. That might be a natural part of the conversation.

That was followed by this.

I just emailed willÂ…heÂ’s such a nice guyÂ…acts much older than his ageÂ…and hes really in great shapeÂ….i am just finished riding my bike on a 25 mile journey now, heading to the gymÂ….whats school like for you this year?

Talk about mutual acquaintances is hardly outrageous – and since Foley was known to be something of a fitness buff, the comments about biking and working out shouldn’t surprise anyone. And more importantly, I see nothing sexual in this.

And then there is this email – the one that caused the young man to drop all communication.

how are you weathering the hurricaneÂ…are you safeÂ…send me an email pic of you as wellÂ….

An expression of concern following a natural disaster, and a request for a photo. I guess I donÂ’t see the sexual content here.

Overly friendly? Definitely. Unprofessional? I’d agree. Indicative of Foley’s immaturity? Yep. But a sign of sexual predation? I don’t think so – unless you have some OTHER information to add, information that the House leadership did not have.

On the other hand, someone did have this information – possibly Democrat officials or political operatives. What did they know and when did they know it? I hope that the investigations that have begun examine those questions as well.

This development is troubling – and I think the firing of this staffer is the minimum action needed.

The chief of staff for Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds, Kirk Fordham, resigned after questions were raised about his role in the handling of the congressional page scandal, according to Republican sources on Capitol Hill.

Those sources said Fordham, a former chief of staff for Congressman Mark Foley, had urged Republican leaders last spring not to raise questionable Foley e-mails with the full Congressional Page Board, made up of two Republicans and a Democrat.

"He begged them not to tell the page board," said one of the Republican sources.

ABC, however, wants to paint this as a case of scapegoating.

FordhamÂ’s resignation was demanded by Speaker Hastert.

Fordham was also instrumental in orchestrating Foley's abrupt resignation last week hours after ABC News confronted the congressman with sexually explicit instant messages allegedly sent to pages.

Fordham offered ABC News a deal if it would not publish the content of the instant messages.

"He said we could have the exclusive on the resignation if we did not run direct quotes from the instant messages," said Maddy Sauer, the ABC News producer who dealt with Fordham.

ABC News refused to make any such deal.

It is clear that FordhamÂ’s actions were not in the best interest of the House of Representatives or the page program, but were rather a case of covering for a friend. I suspect that when all is said and done we will find that Fordham knew much more than he claims at this time. IÂ’ll withhold judgment on his boss, Rep Tom Reynolds, until the situation become clearer.

Posted by: Greg at 11:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 781 words, total size 5 kb.

Israel has fulfilled its obligation under the resolution – and Hezbollah has responded by reoccupying positions it is supposed to give up and restricting the access of everyone else – including UNFIL – to those bases.

On Yom Kippur, Oct. 2, 24 hours after the last Israeli soldier left South Lebanon and the day before UNIFIL published its rules of engagement, Hizballah placed roadblocks on all the approaches to the central sector of the South and the entrances to the towns and villages reoccupied by its forces and their rocket units.

These enclaves were declared “closed military zones.”

DEBKAfile’s exclusive military and Western intelligence sources report that neither the Lebanese army which moved south nor the international peacekeepers of UNIFIL venture to set foot in these enclaves. Nor did they raise a finger to block the first broad-daylight consignment of advanced Iranian weapons to be delivered in Lebanon via Syria since the August 14 ceasefire.

This coordinated Hizballah-Iranian-Syrian ploy has brought into question the point of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 which was to prevent the resumption of hostilities and Hizballah’s rearmament while helping the Beirut government and army assert its sovereignty in the South. It has also made a mockery of the UN Force and its missions.

These developments effectively assign UN Security Council resolution 1701 to the same dustbin as resolution 1559 which ordered Hizballah disarmed.
It is especially noted that the Israeli government has made no military or diplomatic response to these violations, or even informed the public that Hizballah has redeployed in the precise positions from which it blitzed Haifa, Nahariya, Carmiel, Acre and W. Galilee for more than a month.

Tuesday, Oct. 3, after Hizballah completed its redeployment, the southern commander who orchestrated the rocket bombardment of Israel, Sheikh Nabil Qauq, made his first appearance since the war. He announced that his forces had regrouped, fully armed and in command of rocket supplies, in exactly the same positions facing the Israeli border as they had occupied when they went to war on July 12.

As I states back at the time of the Israeli incursions into Lebanon, it appears that an insufficient number of terrorists were killed by the Israelis to guarantee their security.

Posted by: Greg at 11:09 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 374 words, total size 2 kb.

Israel has fulfilled its obligation under the resolution – and Hezbollah has responded by reoccupying positions it is supposed to give up and restricting the access of everyone else – including UNFIL – to those bases.

On Yom Kippur, Oct. 2, 24 hours after the last Israeli soldier left South Lebanon and the day before UNIFIL published its rules of engagement, Hizballah placed roadblocks on all the approaches to the central sector of the South and the entrances to the towns and villages reoccupied by its forces and their rocket units.

These enclaves were declared “closed military zones.”

DEBKAfileÂ’s exclusive military and Western intelligence sources report that neither the Lebanese army which moved south nor the international peacekeepers of UNIFIL venture to set foot in these enclaves. Nor did they raise a finger to block the first broad-daylight consignment of advanced Iranian weapons to be delivered in Lebanon via Syria since the August 14 ceasefire.

This coordinated Hizballah-Iranian-Syrian ploy has brought into question the point of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 which was to prevent the resumption of hostilities and HizballahÂ’s rearmament while helping the Beirut government and army assert its sovereignty in the South. It has also made a mockery of the UN Force and its missions.

These developments effectively assign UN Security Council resolution 1701 to the same dustbin as resolution 1559 which ordered Hizballah disarmed.
It is especially noted that the Israeli government has made no military or diplomatic response to these violations, or even informed the public that Hizballah has redeployed in the precise positions from which it blitzed Haifa, Nahariya, Carmiel, Acre and W. Galilee for more than a month.

Tuesday, Oct. 3, after Hizballah completed its redeployment, the southern commander who orchestrated the rocket bombardment of Israel, Sheikh Nabil Qauq, made his first appearance since the war. He announced that his forces had regrouped, fully armed and in command of rocket supplies, in exactly the same positions facing the Israeli border as they had occupied when they went to war on July 12.

As I states back at the time of the Israeli incursions into Lebanon, it appears that an insufficient number of terrorists were killed by the Israelis to guarantee their security.

Posted by: Greg at 11:09 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 379 words, total size 3 kb.

Those who object to Harry Potter books being in the public or school library simply need to sit down and shut up. Not every library book can or should reflect your views.

A suburban county that sparked a public outcry when its libraries temporarily eliminated funding for Spanish-language fiction is now being asked to ban Harry Potter books from its schools.

Laura Mallory, a mother of four, told a hearing officer for the Gwinnett County Board of Education on Tuesday that the popular fiction series are an "evil" attempt to indoctrinate children in the Wicca religion.

Board of Education attorney Victoria Sweeny said that if schools were to remove all books containing reference to witches, they would have to ban "Macbeth" and "Cinderella."

"There's a mountain of evidence for keeping Harry Potter," she said, adding that the books don't support any particular religion but present instead universal themes of friendship and overcoming adversity.

The books are age appropriate and of high quality among other works of the juvenile fiction category. Eliminating them would leave the library impoverished in many ways.

Posted by: Greg at 11:03 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.

Proof that past mistakes can be corrected.

Just before 6 p.m. on a recent evening, students began to fill a lecture hall at Vanderbilt University. Some pressed cellphones to their ears, others sipped cups of coffee. Flip-flops scuffed the carpet as the students shed book bags and opened laptops

A typical class, perhaps — until the teacher with the shock of white hair rose from the table at the front of the hall, greeted the students and asked a question: “How many of you have experienced a hate crime against yourself? Let’s see the hands.”

So began the lecture by the Rev. James M. Lawson Jr., 78, who returned to teach at Vanderbilt this fall, 46 years after the university expelled him for his role in lunch-counter sit-ins that made Nashville a springboard for a generation of civil rights activists.

The expulsion of Mr. Lawson, a Methodist divinity student who was one of the nationÂ’s leading scholars of civil disobedience and Gandhian nonviolence, was quickly dubbed the Lawson affair, and tarnished VanderbiltÂ’s reputation for years. University officials apologized to Mr. Lawson long ago, honoring him and inviting him back for periodic lectures. Even Harvie Branscomb, the chancellor who presided over Mr. LawsonÂ’s ouster, apologized before his death.

But the invitation to return as a visiting professor is a new chapter in relations between Vanderbilt and its famous former student.

“It isn’t often that an institution gets the chance to correct for a previous error,” said Lucius Outlaw, Vanderbilt’s associate provost for undergraduate education, who first proposed that Mr. Lawson be asked here for the year.

This is a course I would love to be able to take. It isn't often that you get to hear from the participants in historical events.

Posted by: Greg at 10:33 PM | Comments (24) | Add Comment
Post contains 297 words, total size 2 kb.

Remember -- if the drop of the Dow (begun under Clinton and deepened by 9/11) and the increase in oil prices (caused by short supply, increased demand, and natural disasters) were all George Bush's fault, so is this.

The Dow Jones industrial average leaped into record territory Tuesday, highlighting Wall Street's long recovery from the popping of the technology bubble, the 2001 terrorist attacks and a wave of corporate scandals.

The new closing high of 11,727.34 highlights how much things have changed. In January 2000, it was all technology all the time. Internet firms without real business plans and pajama-clad day traders were the glamour kids. Then the bubble burst, Enron Corp. and WorldCom Inc. collapsed, and small investors ran for the hills.

And interestingly enough, the stock market today is much more solid than it was when teh slide began in January of 2000, when the Internet bubble propelled the rise in stock prices.

And oil dropped below $59.00 a barrel yesterday -- and I'm paying $1.89 a gallon for gas.

I love how George W, Bush is managing the economy and bringing down gas prices!

And I won't comment on the great job he has done preventing hurricanes this year.

Posted by: Greg at 10:30 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.

This is not a positive development.

North Korea declared Tuesday that it would conduct a nuclear test to bolster its defenses against the United States, raising tensions in the region and marking the communist government's first unambiguous pledge to prove it has become a nuclear power.

Though North Korea has previously said it possesses nuclear bombs -- U.S. intelligence officials have estimated it could have as many as 11 -- a test detonation would dramatically change the region's power dynamics. Analysts have said the United States and area neighbors including China, Japan and South Korea would be forced to deal far more harshly with the North Koreans.

A test would be a "very provocative act," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said during a visit to Cairo. It would create a "qualitatively different situation on the Korean Peninsula" that would spill over into the entire region, she said. Rice declined to predict what the U.S. response might be.

In a statement issued through the official KCNA news service, North Korea's Foreign Ministry said the government would "conduct a nuclear test under conditions where safety is firmly guaranteed." The statement did not say when the test might occur, but added that the North's "nuclear weapons will serve as reliable war deterrent for protecting the supreme interests of the state and the security of the Korean nation from the U.S. threat of aggression."

If such a test occurs, the US and other nations must respond to eliminate the remaining weapons and North Korea's nuclear program.

I'd suggest bombing North Korea back to the Stone Age, except for the fact that most North Koreans are already living in conditions pretty close to that due to the policies of the corrupt dicatorship of Kim Jong-Il. I guess we'll just have to bomb them back to the Paleolothic Age from the Neolithic.

And by the way -- what president's ineffective policies allowed for the North Koreans to develop nuclear weapons while receiving US assistance? The same president whose ineffective policy on terrorism allowed Osama to remain at large to plan the 9/11 attacks. Thanks, Bill!

Posted by: Greg at 10:21 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 357 words, total size 2 kb.

Looks like the internet is a place where Gov. Mitt Romney has a lot of support.

There are the Texans for Mitt, the Tennesseeans for Mitt, the Iowans for Mitt. Then there are the Evangelicals for Mitt, the Catholics for Mitt and the Law Students for Mitt.

Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney isn't a declared candidate for president yet, but already several Web logs, or blogs, are sprouting up to promote the Republican for the White House in 2008.

Like the grass-roots efforts of old, this is the newfound Web-roots.

About 20 states now have their own Web sites with fans marketing Romney as the best choice to succeed President Bush. And that's in addition to other sites popping up with other groups, such as Women for Romney, Students for Romney and even "My Man Mitt," which is jumping the gun to ask readers to vote on who would make a great vice president for Romney.

"The Internet's such a powerful force in politics now that I think we could do some good things to get his name out," says Nathan Burd, who runs AmericansforMitt.com and is one of the founders of the movement to host sites in every state.

The blogs - the founders of which all say they are independent of the campaign - focus on a variety of issues, with some rounding up statements the governor has made about taxes, abortion or terrorism. Others post news clippings about Romney and commentary about his positions or the coverage he's getting.

Now IÂ’ve made no secret of my support for Romney, and recently became one of the co-bloggers over at Texans for Mitt Romney. And I keep seeing more and more support springing up for the man around the Internet.

I believe that Mitt will be teh man to beat in 2008.

Posted by: Greg at 10:58 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 308 words, total size 2 kb.

Saturday is the christening of AmericaÂ’s next aircraft carrier. President George W. Bush will be on hand for the event, which will have special meaning for him and his family. You see, the ship will be named for the 41st President of the United States, George H. W. Bush, his father.

President Bush will join his parents at Saturday's christening of the nation's newest aircraft carrier, named for his father, at shipbuilder Northrop Grumman Newport News.

The carrier, CVN-77, is called the George H.W. Bush, after the country's 41st president.

President Bush will participate in the ceremony, said Blair Jones, a White House spokesman.

"This is a tremendous honor for the president's father, and he's looking forward to the christening," Jones said Monday.

The elder Bush's daughter, Doro Bush Koch, the ship's sponsor, will break the traditional bottle of sparkling wine on the flattop's bow.

Northrop Grumman's Newport News sector began construction of the approximately $6 billion nuclear-powered ship in 2001 and plans to deliver it to the Navy in late 2008.

It is the last of 10 Nimitz-class carriers and includes technology and improved features that will serve as a bridge to the Navy's next-generation carrier, the CVN-21, now under design and planning at Newport News.

A well-deserved honor for a man whose life has been devoted to public service.

Posted by: Greg at 10:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 229 words, total size 2 kb.

This foreign-born Muslim's actions are beyond the pale. If he objects to the memorializing of those killed by his co-religionists, send him back where he wonÂ’t have to look at displays honoring infidel victims of his jihadi brethren.

A man described by police as a Turkish-born Muslim was charged yesterday with destroying a Queens memorial to a fallen 9/11 cop while screaming, "This is political!" The Post has learned.

Adnan Emre, 26, tore down a portion of Officer Paul Talty's tribute attached to a light post at 50th Avenue and Vernon Boulevard in Long Island City, police sources said.

It consisted of 5-inch-by-7-inch picture of the late officer, a cross, a plaque and crossed American and Irish flags. The plaque is inscribed, "Rest in Peace, Paul. We miss you. God Bless."

Emre ripped down the cross at about 7:52 a.m., cops said, and announced his deed by screaming, "This is political!"

"There are so many deranged people," said the officer's mom, Barbara Talty. "This doesn't surprise me, but it's sad."

Talty's sister, Patricia Dougan, said the suspect must be unstable.
"I just have to think whoever would do this isn't right in the mind," Dougan said.

A passing MTA booth clerk witnessed the vandalism and called cops, who responded from the 108th Precinct station house just down the block.

Emre was charged with criminal mischief and disorderly conduct, said a spokeswoman for Queens District Attorney Richard Brown. He faces a maximum penalty of a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.

I don’t think this guy is unstable – simply evil. We don’t need evil foreigners in this country, so box him up and ship him back to Turkey.

Posted by: Greg at 10:42 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 289 words, total size 2 kb.

I do believe that Mark Foley’s depravity has reached or surpassed Clinton’s use of Monica as a humidor or getting “serviced” while on the phone with a Congressman.

Former Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) interrupted a vote on the floor of the House in 2003 to engage in Internet sex with a high school student who had served as a congressional page, according to new Internet instant messages provided to ABC News by former pages.

ABC News now has obtained 52 separate instant message exchanges, which former pages say were sent by Foley, using the screen name Maf54, to two different boys under the age of 18.

This message was dated April 2003, at approximately 7 p.m., according to the message time stamp.

Maf54: I miss you
Teen: ya me too
Maf54: we are still voting
Maf54: you miss me too
The exchange continues in which Foley and the teen both appear to describe having sexual orgasms.
Maf54: ok..i better go vote..did you know you would have this effect on me
Teen: lol I guessed
Teen: ya go voteÂ…I don't want to keep you from doing our job
Maf54: can I have a good kiss goodnight
Teen: :-*
Teen:

The House voted that evening on HR 1559, Emergency War Time supplemental appropriations.

According to another message, Foley also invites the teen and a friend to come to his house near Capitol Hill so they can drink alcohol.

Teen: are you going to be in town over the veterans day weekend
Maf54: I may be now that your coming
Maf54: who you coming to visit
Teen: haha good stuff
Teen: umm no one really
Maf54: we will be adjourned ny then
Teen: oh good
Maf54: by
Maf54: then we can have a few drinks
Maf54: lol
Teen: yes yes ;-)
Maf54: your not old enough to drink
Teen: shhhÂ…
Maf54: ok
Teen: that's not what my ID says
Teen: lol
Maf54: ok
Teen: I probably shouldn't be telling you that huh
Maf54: we may need to drink at my house so we don't get busted

I am horrified and disgusted.

And I want to know who knew of these actions or had copies of these messages and did nothing to safeguard the young people involved.

And regardless, I want to see the sick freak go to jail for a very long time.

Posted by: Greg at 10:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 404 words, total size 2 kb.

We keep getting this nonsense from Vicente Fox, the President Pendejo of Mexico.

Mexican President Vicente Fox, who leaves office Dec. 1, has called the barrier "shameful" and compared it to the Berlin Wall. His spokesman yesterday urged Bush to veto the bill.

"This decision hurts bilateral relations, goes against the spirit of cooperation needed to guarantee security on the common border, creates a climate of tension in border communities," Ruben Aguilar told reporters.

I’ll tell you what – if you would keep your border jumpers and drug smugglers out of our country, and we wouldn’t need to build a fence. But since you and your country encourage and profit from both the trafficking in illegal drugs and the trafficking in human beings, we need it. Look in the mirror if you want to know why it has come to this.
Maybe your successor will do a better job with this matter.

Posted by: Greg at 10:35 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 157 words, total size 1 kb.

We keep getting this nonsense from Vicente Fox, the President Pendejo of Mexico.

Mexican President Vicente Fox, who leaves office Dec. 1, has called the barrier "shameful" and compared it to the Berlin Wall. His spokesman yesterday urged Bush to veto the bill.

"This decision hurts bilateral relations, goes against the spirit of cooperation needed to guarantee security on the common border, creates a climate of tension in border communities," Ruben Aguilar told reporters.

I’ll tell you what – if you would keep your border jumpers and drug smugglers out of our country, and we wouldn’t need to build a fence. But since you and your country encourage and profit from both the trafficking in illegal drugs and the trafficking in human beings, we need it. Look in the mirror if you want to know why it has come to this.
Maybe your successor will do a better job with this matter.

Posted by: Greg at 10:35 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 162 words, total size 1 kb.

Arizona Democrats want Republicans to denounce and apologize for one of their own – because they don’t like his ideas on immigration reform.

Several Arizona Democrats are calling on Republicans to denounce controversial comments by a prominent Mesa representative and take steps toward meaningful immigration reform, including tough sanctions on employers who hire illegal immigrants.

The comments last week by Rep. Russell Pearce advocating a return to a mass-deportation program from the 1950s called "Operation Wetback" have outraged many in the Latino community. But the state Republican Party has been silent on the issue, and a spokesman said the party has decided not to comment on the statements by Pearce, a House leader and one of the GOP's leading voices on immigration issues.

* * *

"We need to secure the border and go after employers hiring illegally," [Democrat Rpresentative Steve] Gallardo said. "We need comprehensive reform that is meaningful and successful, not a failed policy from the 1950s."

Actually, the program in question didn’t fail – it was remarkably successful in cutting the number of folks illegally entering and working in the country.

Fifty-three years ago, when newly elected Dwight Eisenhower moved into the White House, America's southern frontier was as porous as a spaghetti sieve. As many as 3 million illegal migrants had walked and waded northward over a period of several years for jobs in California, Arizona, Texas, and points beyond.

President Eisenhower cut off this illegal traffic. He did it quickly and decisively with only 1,075 United States Border Patrol agents - less than one-tenth of today's force. The operation is still highly praised among veterans of the Border Patrol.

* * *

[O]n June 17, 1954, what was called "Operation Wetback" began. Because political resistance was lower in California and Arizona, the roundup of aliens began there. Some 750 agents swept northward through agricultural areas with a goal of 1,000 apprehensions a day. By the end of July, over 50,000 aliens were caught in the two states. Another 488,000, fearing arrest, had fled the country.

By mid-July, the crackdown extended northward into Utah, Nevada, and Idaho, and eastward to Texas.

By September, 80,000 had been taken into custody in Texas, and an estimated 500,000 to 700,000 illegals had left the Lone Star State voluntarily.

Unlike today, Mexicans caught in the roundup were not simply released at the border, where they could easily reenter the US. To discourage their return, Swing arranged for buses and trains to take many aliens deep within Mexico before being set free.

Tens of thousands more were put aboard two hired ships, the Emancipation and the Mercurio. The ships ferried the aliens from Port Isabel, Texas, to Vera Cruz, Mexico, more than 500 miles south.

Now you can argue about whether such a program would be desirable today, but to call it a “failed policy” is clearly not accurate. Given that there were only about 3 million illegals in this country at the time, it is hard to argue that a program that got rid of half of them constitutes a failure. And it is certainly clear that the program was more successful than anything that is going on now.

Maybe the best answer would be to include such a program along with stiffer employer sanctions, a border fence, and proposals put in place other proposals suggested by both Democrats and Republicans – crackdowns on human smugglers and the use of increased technology. I suppose I’d even be open to a guest worker program – once we get the numbe of people illegally in this country down by 90-95%.

But apologize for floating the idea of trying a policy that worked? I donÂ’t think so.

Posted by: Greg at 10:34 AM | Comments (48) | Add Comment
Post contains 623 words, total size 4 kb.

IÂ’ve liked almost every Mormon IÂ’ve ever met. They are among the kindest, most decent folks I know or have known.

At the same time, I do look askance at Mormon theology. I made a serious study of the religion years ago (while dating a Mormon girl – I’ll own that motivation), and I find it impossible to buy into some of the more unusual aspects of Mormon teaching.

But theological differences alone will not keep me from voting for a candidate I otherwise believe to be well-qualified. And that leads me to Dr. James DobsonÂ’s comments on Gov. Mitt RomneyÂ’s religion and its effect on his candidacy.

A prominent and powerful evangelical Christian leader, James Dobson, said yesterday that the Mormon faith practiced by Governor Romney of Massachusetts could pose a serious obstacle if Mr. Romney makes a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2008.

"I don't believe that conservative Christians in large numbers will vote for a Mormon but that remains to be seen, I guess," Mr. Dobson said on a syndicated radio program hosted by a conservative commentator, Laura Ingraham.

Mr. Dobson, the founder of the Colorado-based Focus on the Family, did not say why Christians would fail to support Mr. Romney. Mr. Dobson also acknowledged that the governor's stands on social issues are similar to those of many religious conservatives.

"He's a nice guy. He's a very attractive man. He's got a beautiful wife and a lot of his principles and values are consistent with ours," Mr. Dobson said. A spokesman for Mr. Romney, Eric Fehrnstrom, had no immediate comment.

In 1960, this country put the “Catholic issue” behind it by electing John F. Kennedy to the presidency. Let’s hope that we can place the “Mormon issue” behind us in 2008. That doesn’t mean electing Romney because of his faith, but it does mean that Americans should give him a respectful hearing and thoughtful consideration as a part of his run for office.

And I believe that many -- indeed, most -- among the Christian Right will give him a decent hearing.

"If he's pro-life, pro-family, I don't think he'll have any problem getting the support of evangelical Christians," a founder of the Moral Majority, Rev. Jerry Falwell, told the Clarion-Ledger of Jackson, Mo. earlier this year.

IÂ’m with Falwell on this one.

* * *

Greg Pierce of the Washington Times offers some reasons why Romney would be a good choice for the GOP.

Posted by: Greg at 10:28 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 420 words, total size 3 kb.

Gotta respect the rights of those not covered by the treaties, otherwise our sideÂ’s soldiers might not be treated humanely. That is the argument from the pro-terrorist anti-American anti-war Left.

Yeah. Right.

Like this.

IRAQI officers loyal to Saddam Hussain filmed their cold-blooded murder of two British bomb disposal officers who were captured after a roadside ambush.

An inquest was told that Staff Sergeant Simon Cullingworth, 36, and Sapper Luke Allsopp, 24, thought that they were being taken to hospital for treatment, but instead they were moved to a compound run by SaddamÂ’s military intelligence.

The harrowing ordeal lasted for hours until Iraqi agents killed the pair. The soldiers were buried in a shallow grave.

IÂ’m sure glad our enemies show such high respect the for the terms of theGeneva Convention. Let's give them equally humane treatment.

Posted by: Greg at 10:27 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 147 words, total size 1 kb.

How else can you explain the refusal to take this overly generous offer from the Israelis?

Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit said on Monday that Israel had offered to release up to 1,000 prisoners in exchange for captured soldier Cpl. Gilad Shalit, but Hamas had turned down the proposal.

"[There was] a deal that could have freed 900 to 1,000 prisoners, but sadly they have decided to keep holding him," he told Al-Arabiyeh Television.

Egypt has been mediating between Israel and Hamas over the release of Shalit, who was abducted at Kerem Shalom on the Gaza border on June 25.

So there you have it – a thousand Terrorstinian fighters are worth less than one Israeli soldier. So says Hamas.

Posted by: Greg at 10:24 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 138 words, total size 1 kb.

Proving that the conservative paper is just as capable as the liberal media of entering the Alice in Wonderland world of "First the sentence, then the trial", the Washington Times has called for the resignation of Speaker Dennis Hastert over the Tom Foley case.

The facts of the disgrace of Mark Foley, who was a Republican member of the House from a Florida district until he resigned last week, constitute a disgrace for every Republican member of Congress. Red flags emerged in late 2005, perhaps even earlier, in suggestive and wholly inappropriate e-mail messages to underage congressional pages. His aberrant, predatory -- and possibly criminal -- behavior was an open secret among the pages who were his prey. The evidence was strong enough long enough ago that the speaker should have relieved Mr. Foley of his committee responsibilities contingent on a full investigation to learn what had taken place, whether any laws had been violated and what action, up to and including prosecution, were warranted by the facts. This never happened.

I'm sorry -- the initial emails were not sufficient to take any such actions. Indeed, media outlests that had them found them to be insufficient to even write stories about them. Rather than blame those who found the emails "overly friendly" until the disgusting IMs came out last week, I think it is more important to find out who has had the clearly inappropriate IMs and why they were held back from the authorities untim now. After all, some of them date back a couple of years, which means that they, not the Speaker or any other member of the leadership team, endangered every page.

By the way, what did the initial FBI inquiry into the initial batch of emails conclude last summer?

An FBI official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, said the field office concluded that the e-mails "did not rise to the level of criminal activity." The bureau announced Sunday that it would begin a preliminary investigation into Foley's more explicit electronic exchanges with teenagers.

In other words, the FBI concurred with the judgement made by Hastert and others (including members of the media who had the emails but chose not to run them) -- there was nothing in the emails that needed to be pursued. So what you had with the original batch of materials was a unanimous conclusion by the House Leadership, the FBI, and the press that there simply was not anything in the emails that rose to the level of misconduct.

The release of the IMs changes that.

Unfortunately, it may be a while before the results of the investigation of this matter come out. Let's behave like rational adults and wait for those results rather than engaging in hysterical recriminations over a couple of emails (absent the IMs) that seem less like a sexual predator seeking a victim and more like a responsible adult expressing concern about a young man whose family had just survived one of our nation's biggest natural disasters.

Posted by: Greg at 10:39 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 521 words, total size 3 kb.

It shouldn't be a federal case, but it is. Why? Because some of my colleagues in education appear unable to digest the basic lesson of Tinker v. DesMoines and subsequent decisions on the rights of students while at school.

Amber Mangum was a frequent reader during lunch breaks at her Prince George's County middle school, silently soaking up the adventures of Harry Potter and other tales in the spare minutes before afternoon classes. The habit was never viewed as a problem -- not, a lawsuit alleges, until the book she was reading was the Bible.

A vice principal at Dwight D. Eisenhower Middle School in Laurel last month ordered Amber, then 12, to stop reading the Bible or face punishment, according to a lawsuit filed Friday by Amber's mother. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Greenbelt, alleges that the vice principal's actions violated the girl's civil rights.

"Amber's a new Christian, and she's trying to learn all she can," said Maryann Mangum, the girl's mother. "She reads her Bible and she goes to Sunday school. . . . It really upset me when she was not allowed to read it on her own time."

John White, a spokesman for the school system, said administrators learned of the lawsuit Friday and were not prepared to comment on its claims. "We're just beginning to look into it," he said.

Mangum said her daughter was reading her Bible on Sept. 14 when Vice Principal Jeanetta Rainey approached. According to Mangum and the lawsuit, Rainey told Amber that reading the Bible violated school policy and that she would face discipline if she continued to do so.

Later that day, Amber recounted the episode to Mangum, who is her adoptive mother and also her biological grandmother. James Baker, a family friend, sent a note to the school asking that the principal identify any policy barring students from reading the Bible during their free time.

The note quoted a section of the school system's administrative procedures, saying that students "may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray before tests to the same extent they may engage in comparable, non-disruptive activities."

In other words, not only did the administrator ignore the constitutional rights of Amber Mangum, this administrator also ignored written district policy. And when the family challenged that misconduct, the school's principal decided to send teh complaint down the memory hole and ignore it.

No one is asking for special rights here. All that is being sought is equal rights. And if students may read the book of their choice during non-instructional time, the religious content of their choice cannot legitimately be used to thwart their choice of literature.

Posted by: Greg at 10:29 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 466 words, total size 3 kb.

I would have thought that common sense would have prevailed. making the video was probably not a good idea -- and posting it on the district website was an eve worse one.

A suburban school superintendent says he was only trying to be funny when he took videotaped interviews with his new teachers, spliced in his own gag questions and made the faculty members look like killers, strippers and drug users.

Now he could lose his job.

"How do you like to unwind?" Bremen High School District Superintendent Rich Mitchell asks in the mock documentary that he later posted on the Internet. The tape cuts to a teacher who replies: "I enjoy a lot of leisure activities."

"Such as?" Mitchell asks.

"Killing," says the teacher.

Mitchell asks another teacher: "What were the results of the last drug test that you took?"

The reply: "It was positive."

School board president Evelyn Gleason said Mitchell could be fired over the stunt, though she said the seven-member board will first investigate. "I think at the very least an apology should be made," Gleason said.

"I personally think he stepped over the line when it went on the Web site," she said. "I think it was a bad idea gone wrong."

Now I'm all for a little humour at the beginning of the year, but this seems to have crossed the line. And making the video available where it could circulate is even worse. I wonder if this matter doesn't open the district up to lawsuits.

Posted by: Greg at 10:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.

Injuries are a part of the game of football. So are late hits. I can even accept the occasional “dirty hit”, with appropriate sanctions applied.

But a premeditated action calculated to injure an opposing player, engaged in well after the whistle has blown? That goes far beyond what anyone will recognize as a legitimate part of the game.

Tennessee defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth was ejected early in the third quarter Sunday after he kicked Dallas center Andre Gurode in the face. Now the tackle expects to be punished and knows he deserves it.

* * *

Julius Jones had just scored on a 5-yard run, putting Dallas up 20-6 in what wound up as a 45-14 victory. Gurode's helmet came off, and Haynesworth, standing over him, used his right foot to kick Gurode in the head.

Gurode said they hadn't been talking or having any exchanges that led to Haynesworth kicking him twice. He received stitches above his forehead and beneath his eye.

"In all my years of football, this has never happened to me. I've never been kicked in the face like this, and I've never seen anybody kick nobody else in the face," Gurode said.

A flag was thrown, and Haynesworth followed an official toward the Titans' sideline, protesting.
Haynesworth pulled off his helmet and slammed it to the ground, prompting another flag. Referee Jerome Boger disqualified Haynesworth, and the player walked off the field after talking briefly with Titans coach Jeff Fisher.

This was not accidental. The play had stopped and Haynesworth looked around before assaulting Gurode. Gurode eventually required 30 stitches to his face, and was unable to return to the game due to blurred vison.

Unfortunately, TitanÂ’s coach Jeff Fisher doesnÂ’t appear to understand the gravity of the situation.

The coach called Haynesworth's actions unacceptable and promised he would be punished by the Titans even if the NFL disciplines him.
"It's ridiculous to get to that point. Two back-to-back penalties like that, there's no place for it," Fisher said.

Excuse me? No place for back-to-back penalties? How about “there is no place for actions that would get you charged with a felony if they took place off the field”? Or maybe “there is no place for actions calculated to gravely injure a player, especially after the play is over”?

Haynesworth needs a long suspension – perhaps encompassing the rest of the season – for his misconduct. I would encourage the local prosecutor to consider filing criminal charges in this case. Michael David Smith over at AOL Sports Blog thinks that Gurode should sue Haynesworth. What this thug did cannot, in any way, shape, or form, be classified as “just a part of the game.” And I say this fully acknowledging that Haynesworth has acknowledged that his actions are indefensible.

By the way, I expect that Haynesworth will get a very cool reception the next time he comes to play here in Houston. Andre Gurode is a local boy – a graduate of the school where I teach. I’m sure the fans will give Haynesworth hell.

UPDATE: Looks like the suspension will be for five games, which is unprecedented in NFL history. But I'm still not sure that it is adequate.

The NFL handed down an unprecedented five-game suspension on Monday to Tennessee Titans defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth for kicking Dallas Cowboys center Andre Gurode in the head.

That length of suspension represents the biggest on-field disciplinary action in league history. Charles Martin held the previous high for a suspension, sitting two games for his bodyslam of Bears quarterback Jim McMahon on Nov. 23, 1986.

"There is absolutely no place in the game, or anywhere else, for the inexcusable action that occurred in yesterday's Titans-Cowboys game," commissioner Roger Goodell said in a statement.

"This is an unprecedented suspension," Titans coach Jeff Fisher said. "I feel like his actions on the field were also unprecented."

The coach indicated that Haynesworth would not appeal the decision.

"I felt there needed to be some serious action taken from a discipline standpoint, and I think what the league has done now is adequate," he said.

The suspension will cost Haynesworth $190,070 -- $38,014 per game -- which adds up to five-seventeenths of his 2006 base salary of $646,251.

"I think five games, five paychecks is substantial," Fisher said.

The suspension takes effect immediately. Haynesworth can return on Nov. 19 for the Titans' game at Philadelphia.

That means that Haynesworth will be with the team when they come to Houston, Gurode's hometown, on December 10. I want to encourage every fan of the Houston Texans to make sure that Hanesworth is the recipient of the sort of contempt he deserves from every lover of the game. Indeed, I encourage fans in every city to boo haynesworth and make sure he knows that we don't need his sort in the NFL.

And fortunately, there is still the possibility of prosecution.

The action could potentially cost Haynesworth more than a suspension from the football field. The Nashville, Tenn., police department issued a statement saying it "stands ready to assist [Andre] Gurode in criminally prosecuting [Albert] Haynesworth if Gurode so chooses."

Gurode's cooperation appears key to any charges being filed against Haynesworth.

"In assault situations, an affirmative desire for prosecution and an acknowledgement of cooperation from the victim, in this case Gurode, are preferable before officers and prosecuting attorneys move forward with the development of a case," the statement continued.

Posted by: Greg at 08:40 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 914 words, total size 6 kb.

IÂ’d be shocked, but weÂ’ve all seen in recent years that too many Muslims have no sense of shame.

The Islamic world will be relieved if the Pope makes a full apology," Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.

In an interview on the Fox TV, Erdogan said that religious leaders should refrain from using the words of Islam and terrorism together.

"Such remarks hurt all the Muslims. We should refrain from remarks which may overshadow alliance of civilizations," he stressed.

First, the Pope has nothing to apologize for.

Second, weÂ’ll quit linking Islam and terrorism when the terrorists do.

Posted by: Greg at 08:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 110 words, total size 1 kb.

Two American citizens -- one native born -- who were placed on the no-fly list and told they could not return to the United States without an FBI interview were permitted to return to the country yesterday.

Two American citizens of Pakistani descent returned to the United States on Sunday, five months after they were denied permission to fly home to California unless they submitted to an interrogation by F.B.I. terrorism investigators.

The men, Muhammad Ismail, 45, and his son, Jaber, 19, of the Northern California farming town of Lodi, returned from Pakistan on a flight that landed at Kennedy Airport in New York around 3:30 p.m. Eastern time. They were scheduled to arrive in California on Sunday night or early Monday on a connecting flight, their lawyer said Sunday.

The Ismails are an uncle and cousin of Hamid Hayat, a Lodi man who was convicted in April in federal court of providing material support to terrorists. Mr. Hayat told investigators he had attended a terrorism training camp during a long stay in Pakistan and intended to carry out unspecified attacks in the United States. Mr. HayatÂ’s father, Umer, was convicted on a lesser charge of lying to investigators about the amount of cash he carried to Pakistan on a 2003 trip, but a jury deadlocked on terrorism charges.

The Ismails were not charged in the case. They attributed their predicament to being related to the Hayats, the only people to have been charged in what federal prosecutors have described as an investigation into possible terrorism links in Lodi.

Julia Harumi Mass of the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California, who is representing the Ismails, said the pair had no terrorism connections. In a complaint in August to the Department of Homeland Security, she urged the authorities to explain any accusations against them and why they had been denied permission to fly home.

Legal experts said the matter raised questions about balancing terrorism investigations against American citizensÂ’ right to travel freely without having been charged with a crime or detained as a suspect.

This was the proper move by the FBI. The federal government has no legitimate right to strand its citizens in a foreign country as a means of coercing them to waive their right to not speak to law enforcement officials.

Now we need to investigate how such an over-broad order was issued in the first place, and guarantee that such an attrocity never happens again.

Posted by: Greg at 10:28 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 423 words, total size 3 kb.

Recognizing that the policy in place for fourteen years was flawed, the Houston Police Department has modified its handling of immigration issues.

Under fire in recent months over its policy toward illegal immigrants, the Houston Police Department is unveiling new procedures today to allow more cooperation with federal agents trying to catch criminals living in the country illegally.

Officers still will not inquire about the immigration status of people they haven't arrested, so the changes are unlikely to quiet critics who have labeled Houston a "sanctuary city" for illegal immigrants.

But the department is making several key revisions.

An announcement is expected today, less than two weeks after the shooting death of police officer Rodney Johnson caused simmering opposition to the department policy to flare anew. An illegal immigrant who previously had been deported is charged in the slaying.

Now what this means is that HPD won't go on ignoring violations of immigration laws, but will instead cooperate with federal authorities .

Among the changes to take effect this week:

•The department will hold people detained or arrested for traffic violations or other minor crimes — Class C misdemeanors — if warrant checks show they are wanted by federal agents for defying an order to leave the country or for returning after being deported in connection with a criminal case. Under existing policy, police generally did not hold such people for federal authorities, even if officers were aware of the federal warrants.

•The department will allow immigration agents unfettered access to the city's two jails, as they have had in the Harris County jail, and officers will start asking all arrestees whether they are citizens.

•Fingerprints of anyone booked into the jails without proper identification will be checked against a national fingerprint database. That could help officers identify wanted criminals, including people wanted for serious immigration violations, police say.

Now the policy does not go far enough, in my book. HPD officers should inquire about the immigration status of ALL individuals arrested or cited and then notify federal authorities of those here illegally. This is, however, a good start.

And for those who argue that immigration is a federal issue and that the local cops should not be involved in enforcing such laws, would you care to let us know what other federal laws you don't want cops enforcing?

Kidnapping?

Terrorism?

Drug trafficking?

Come on, surely there must be some other federal law besides the one against border jumping that you don't believe local cops should enforce.

And interestingly enough, the policy change was expedited by the murder of HPD Officer Rodney Johnson by a previously-deported, child-molesting, border-jumping immigration criminal.

The death of officer Rodney Johnson expedited the Houston Police Department's new policy of asking people arrested in minor crimes for identification and running criminal background checks on those who cannot provide it, but the change was being formulated before he was killed during the arrest of an illegal immigrant, Mayor Bill White said Sunday.

"That did provide an additional impetus to bring this to conclusion, but it was in the works anyway," White said at a news conference Sunday formally announcing the change. "Both Chief (Hurtt) and I, after that death, we asked for an expedited review of everything we could to identify people who are wanted (for criminal activity)."

I wonder -- will Houston city councilwoman Ada Edwards call Mayor White and Chief Hurtt "pimps" for making the change, as she did Councilwoman Shelley Sekula-Gibbs when the GOP congressional candidate courageously called for the policy's change on the day of Johnson's funeral?

Posted by: Greg at 10:19 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 614 words, total size 4 kb.

The winning entries in the Watcher's Council vote for this week are Unhinged or Calculated by Soccer Dad, and Fear and Loathing in the Land of the Pure by Isaac Schrödinger.  Here are the full results of the vote

Posted by: Greg at 09:58 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 191 words, total size 4 kb.

When I first read about the emails by Rep. Mark Foley to a congressional page, I dismissed the matter as unimportant and not worthy of comment.

After all, this was not a stranger seeking out kids on the internet -- this was a known, trusted adult. And the information he sought, which his staff claimed was for a letter of recommendation, I routinely ask kids for full name, address, phone number, date of birth, and information about extracurricular information when I write them letters of recommendation for college, and keep that information (and the letters) on file for a couple of years for future reference. And I can't tell you the number of pictures of former students I have around my classroom.

And while I found the question about what the young man wanted for his birthday to be a bit odd, if you consider that the kid lives in the area hit by Hurricane Katrina it looks like an act of kindness subject to wild misinterpretation.

And then the IM came out -- and Foley rightly resigned.

But we are now faced with the question of who knew what and when.

House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) was notified early this year of inappropriate e-mails from former representative Mark Foley (R-Fla.) to a 16-year-old page, a top GOP House member said yesterday -- contradicting the speaker's assertions that he learned of concerns about Foley only last week.

Hastert did not dispute the claims of Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.), and his office confirmed that some of Hastert's top aides knew last year that Foley had been ordered to cease contact with the boy and to treat all pages respectfully.

* * *

Hastert's aides learned in the fall of 2005 only of e-mail exchanges that House officials eventually deemed "over-friendly" with the Louisiana teenager, the speaker's office said yesterday in a lengthy statement. "While the Speaker does not explicitly recall this conversation" with Reynolds, the statement said, "he has no reason to dispute Congressman Reynolds's recollection that he reported to him on the problem and its resolution."

Boehner and Reynolds said their offices learned of the Foley e-mails months ago from Rep. Rodney Alexander (R), who sponsored the page from his northeastern-Louisiana district.

"Rodney Alexander brought to my attention the existence of the e-mails between Mark Foley and a former page of Mr. Alexander's," Reynolds said yesterday. "Despite the fact that I had not seen the e-mails in question, and Mr. Alexander told me that the parents didn't want the matter pursued, I told the speaker of the conversation Mr. Alexander had with me."

Now if all they had were the initial batch of emails, I think the matter may well have been handled appropriately. Hastert, a former teacher and coach, likely would have looked at them exactly as I did. And he did exactly what I believe iIwould have done in that situation -- tell a colleague to be more aware of appropriate boundaries and to cease contact with the boy. Otherwise, there was nothing to the matter to be done. No law appeareds to be broken based upon the facts as initially known.

But unless someone can demonstrate that the IMs were known to congressional leaders or their staffs, Democrat politicization of Foley's misdeeds is inappropriate. Not that it will stop statements like this.

With his statement, [Rep. Tom] Reynolds, who is locked in a difficult reelection campaign, signaled he was unwilling to take the fall alone amid partisan attacks that were becoming increasingly vituperative. The Democratic National Committee yesterday issued a statement asking "Why Did Tom Reynolds Cover Up Congressman's Sex Crimes?" It continued: "While the shocking [online] exchanges produced an immediate uproar that cost Congressman Foley his job, at least one member of the House Republican leadership had known about the situation for months and did nothing about it: . . . Reynolds."

Now I agree with people on both sides of the aisle that this matter needs further inquiry. But absent evidence that the sexually-charged IMs were known before last week, I have to argue that this is a scandal without substance.

UPDATE: GOPBloggers asks What Did The Media Know About Foley And How Long Did They Know It?

Everyone from the St. Petersburg Times to the Palm Beach Post to Roll Call to the Washington Post had the emails that were released by ABC this past Thursday, and none of them went with the story. It seems rather odd now that those same reporters are asking Hastert and others, what did you know and when did you know it?

An interesting question, given that the St. Petersburg Times admits to having the original emails back in November. If they were not significant enough for them to run the story back then, how is it they can damn the GOP leadership in Congress for also finding them to be less than compelling?

MORE AT: Captain's Quarters, Ms. Underestimated, Stop the ACLU, LaShawn Barber, Florida Masochist, Sister Toldjah, A Blog For All, Wizbang Politics, Blue Crab Boulevard, Lawhawk, Unpartisan, Gay Patriot, Real Clear Politics, The American Mind, Right Wing News, Suitably Flip, Ace of Spades, Michelle Malkin.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Conservative Cat, Bacon Bits, Bullwinkle Blog, Third World County, Adam's Blog, Stuck On Stupid, Clash of Civilizations, Random Yak, Blue Star Chronicles, Pursuing Holiness, Samantha Burns, Uncooperative Blogger, Stop the ACLU, Church & State, Is It Just Me?

Posted by: Greg at 12:49 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 912 words, total size 8 kb.

I mean after all, just because they are charged with drug offenses doesn't mean that they shoud be kicked out of the country, does it -- even if they entered illegally?

The Denver district attorney's office under gubernatorial candidate Bill Ritter approved plea bargains that prevented the deportation of illegal and legal immigrants charged with drug, assault and other crimes.

The office allowed defendants to plead guilty to trespassing on agricultural land instead of the crimes they actually were accused of 152 times from 1998 through 2004. Other counties - Jefferson, Adams and Arapahoe - had only 75 convictions combined for the crime, according to court records.

Former Denver District Attorney Norm Early, who was Ritter's predecessor, laughed when he heard about the farm charges in urban Denver.

"I reviewed all my case dispositions, and I never remember that coming up," he said.

A review of 15 of the agricultural trespass cases in Denver showed that heroin and cocaine charges, theft of motor vehicles and domestic violence crimes - miles away from any farm or open land - were transformed into agricultural trespass.

"This plea agreement was reached with the the specific purpose of not pleading guilty to an offense that would subject (the defendant) to deportation proceedings," wrote a defense attorney in a motion filed in a Denver court Oct. 11, 2000.

The defendant, Ernesto Leon Reyes, was a resident alien who was initially charged with five drug counts related to his possession and intention to distribute 2,000 grams of methamphetamine.

If convicted of the drug charge, Reyes could have been deported after serving time. Instead, after pleading guilty to the trespass on agricultural land charge, Reyes received probation and stayed in the United States.

Did you folks get that one -- drug dealers remained in this country because the DA's office didn't want to subject them to the "hardship" of going back where they came from. Sounds like prosecutorial malfeasance to me.

And now Bill Ritter and the Democrats want him to be Governor of Colorado.

Vote Republican in Colorado and the rest of the country for every office -- public safety and America's borders depend on it.

Posted by: Greg at 09:51 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 384 words, total size 2 kb.

There was clearly no merit to this suit -- the law is clear that illegal immigrant parents of American citizens have no right to stay in this country simply because they managed to breed while breaking this country's laws. And there is no legitimate counstitutional claim here, either.

A federal judge struck a blow Friday to the hopes of an immigration activist who has taken refuge in a Chicago church to avoid deportation, dismissing her lawsuit against the government.

Elvira Arellano, 31, a Mexican national, had hoped that U.S. District Judge Amy J. St. Eve would rule that deporting her would violate the constitutional rights of her 7-year-old son, Saul, an American citizen.

But St. Eve ruled that no one's rights would be violated by deporting Arellano back to Mexico. She did say, however, the child would suffer a hardship.

"The question before the court is whether that hardship is of constitutional magnitude -- under any construction of the alleged facts, it is not," St. Eve said in her order.

St. Eve concluded that the pending removal order does not prevent Saul from exercising his rights of citizenship.

"Saul will not suffer any injury to his constitutional right to remain in the United States," she said.

Indeed, I'm struck by this observation that the Constitution is not violated just because all options available to a person have negative aspects to them.

"In fact, the injury Saul alleges is not the same as the injury his mother will suffer. Her injury is compelled removal; his is the unenviable fork in the road [i.e., whether to uproot or to live apart from his mother] that arises as a result of his mother's compelled removal," the judge said.

Yes, the boy can stay in the United States -- whether under the guardianship of someone designated by his mother or as a ward of the state. Or Saul's mother may elect to take her son back to Mexico, which in no way impairs his citizenship rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The choice is entirely in the hands of Elvira Arellano.

But then again, this all comes down to choices made by the mother.

Arellano was supposed to surrender for deportation to Mexico on Aug. 15.

Instead, she and her son moved into a cramped room in the storefront church sandwiched between a bank and a beauty parlor in Chicago's heavily Puerto Rican Humboldt Park neighborhood.

She has frequently told reporters visiting the church she wants to stay in the United States to provide a better life for herself and her son.

"I'm not going to leave. This is a place where God has put me, this is God's will and I'm going to stay here," Arellano has said.

Arellano first was deported from the United States shortly after illegally crossing the border in 1997, according to immigration enforcement. She says she returned within days, went on to live in Oregon for three years and moved to Chicago in 2000.

She was arrested in 2002 at O'Hare International Airport, where she was employed as a cleaning woman, and subsequently convicted of working under a false Social Security number.

So you see, this woman has broken American law multiple times, twice sneaking into this country like a thief in the night, working illegally in this country and fraudulently using false documentation. Violating her deportation order and hiding out in a church in an attempt to avoid the workings of American law (gee -- where are the church-state separationists on this one?) Oh, yeah -- and choosing to have a child.

The time has come for a SWAT team to enter the church to arrest Elvira Arellano.

Cuff her.

Stuff her.

Send her back.

Oh, yes -- and indict Rev. Walter Coleman, pastor of Adalberto United Methodist Church for harboring a fugitive.

And by the way -- this story presents the best available argument for amending the Constituion to do away with birthright citizenship for the children of border-jumping immigration criminals.

OPEN TRACKBACKING AT Conservative Cat, Bacon Bits, Bullwinkle Blog, Third World County, Adam's Blog, Stuck On Stupid, Clash of Civilizations, Random Yak, Blue Star Chronicles, Pursuing Holiness, Samantha Burns, Uncooperative Blogger, Stop the ACLU, Church & State, Is It Just Me?

Posted by: Greg at 09:40 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 708 words, total size 6 kb.

Here is a politician with a little bit of moral clarity on the issue of terrorism and Islam.

A top German politician and close ally of Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday Islam was one of the main factors in religiously motivated violence, and urged Germany's Muslims to reject all forms of brutality.

But Ronald Pofalla, general-secretary of Merkel's conservative Christian Democrats, also acknowledged that many Muslims would find it painful that their religion was being abused for violent ends.

"Certainly it is painful for many Muslims that their religion is misused for violence," Pofalla wrote in a guest column for Sunday's Bild am Sonntag newspaper.

"But ... the problem of religiously motivated violence is today almost exclusively a problem of Islam. In addition, many of the victims are Muslims themselves," he said, according to extracts released in advance on Saturday.

Pofalla also noted that Muslims need to be prepared to accept criticism of their faith, as well as teh right of Christians to defend theirs.

The observation is quite accurate -- most of the victims of violence by Muslims are other Muslims. Now I could argue that Pofalla is wrong in stating that Islam is being misused, given the long and consistently bloody history of the followers of teh false prophet Muhammad, but I'm willing to concede that in many parts of the world we find a plurality of Muslims who object to terrorism in the name of their faith. The problem, of course, is that they are afraid to speak out or act against the violent faction among them.

I cannot help but be struck, however, by the response to a statement that implicitly rejects the notion that Islam is a violent faith and that notes that the violence takes a heavier toll on Muslims than on anyone else.

The Central Council of Muslims in Germany criticized Pofalla's comments, saying generalizations such as he made only reinforced stereotypes and prejudices.

"I get the impression that some CDU people want to take one step forward and two steps back," Aiman Mazyek, the Council's general-secretary, told Sunday's Tagesspiegel newspaper.

In other words, "How dare you criticize Islam, you infidel dog! You should be killed for insulting our religion."

Look for such statemetns to begin appearing from the jihadis any time now -- and for the Muslims who claim to oppose violence and oppression carried out in the name of their religion.

Posted by: Greg at 09:07 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 411 words, total size 3 kb.