Monthly Archives: May 2012

The Voters Have Spoken–Is Anyone Listening ?

Posted on by

Yesterday there was an election in Foxboro, Massachusetts. If you are a football fan, you know where Foxboro is, but you may not know that the town has been involved in a heated discussion as to whether or not Steve Wynn should be allowed to build a casino near the football stadium. Regardless of your view on casinos, there are some very practical reasons local residents oppose the casino–traffic in the area where the casino would be built is already a problem during stadium events–the area is simply not equipped for the increased traffic the casino would bring. Anyway, yesterday the people of Foxboro spoke out.

Today’s Attleboro Sun Chronicle reports:

A pair of anti-casino candidates, incumbent Lorraine Brue and former state Rep. Ginny Coppola, easily won election over incumbent Larry Harrington and school committee member Martha Slattery, who both supported negotiating a deal on the casino and letting residents make the final decision in a binding referendum

Fifty-eight percent of Foxboro’s registered voters voted in the election yesterday. Last year seventeen percent voted in the town election.

The article further reports:

Under the state’s new expanded gambling law, selectmen would have to vote to enter into negotiations with Wynn for the project to move forward.

With Monday’s results, four of the five board members have come out against the project, meaning the proposal now faces tough odds.

When asked if Monday’s vote would effectively kill the project, Coppola said she hopes the developers look at the message sent by residents.

“Mr. Wynn and Mr. Kraft should look at the results of this election,” she said.

 Brue agreed.“(The voters) sent the message that they don’t want a casino,” she said.

 
It will be interesting to see what happens next.
Enhanced by Zemanta

Sometimes I Just Wonder Why People Do Things

Posted on by

Yesterday CNS News posted an article about Heath and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius‘ invitation to speak at Georgetown University

The article reports:

Georgetown University Director of Media Relations Rachel Pugh did not respond to an inquiry from CNSNews.com. However, she gave a statement to the Cardinal Newman Society, pointing out that Sebelius was not giving a commencement address at Georgetown’s graduation but was speaking at an “annual student and faculty awards event.”

“Secretary Sebelius is not speaking at Georgetown’s commencement,” said Pugh. “She is speaking at Georgetown Public Policy Institute’s annual student and faculty awards event.”

The detail of exactly where at the University Ms. Sebelius is speaking is not the problem–the problem is Ms. Sebelius’ actions regarding the Catholic Church’s right to practice its religious beliefs.

The article at CNS News explains why Ms. Sebelius is controversial:

Sebelius’s regulation–in combination with the individual insurance mandate in Obamacare–requires that virtually all individual Americans must purchase health care plans that cover sterilizations, contraceptives and abortifacients. The only employers that would be exempt from covering these items in their health-care plans are non-profit “religious” organizations that meet four criteria: 1) their purpose is to inculcate religious values, 2) they primarily hire people of their own religion, 3) they primarily serve people of their own religion, and 4) they are organized under the section of the Internal Revenue Code specifically used by churches.

This narrow exemption does not extend to Catholic universities, schools, hospitals and charitable organizations.

This allows for an unprecedented intrusion into religious organizations by the government, in addition to taking away the concept of the ‘conscience clause’ from those organizations. This regulation is in direct violation of the First Amendment. It is not only an attack on the Catholic Church, it is a warning to all people of faith that the government has no intention of honoring the First Amendment and respecting their beliefs.

I have no idea why Georgetown University invited Ms. Sebelius to speak. The invitation seriously undermines their image as a Catholic University.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Seen On Facebook

Posted on by

When NASA first started sending up astronauts, they quickly discovered that ballpoint pens would not work in zero gravity. To combat the problem NASA spent a decade and $12 billion to develop a pen that works in zero gravity, upside down, underwater, and almost on any surface including glass and at a temperature ranging from below freezing to 300 degrees celcius. THE RUSSIANS USED A PENCIL.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Realize That This Is A Politically Incorrect Idea–But It Is True

Posted on by

Yesterday the Jerusalem Post posted an article with the headline, “There is no such thing as a two-state solution.” Unfortunately, based on the history of the past 60+ years, that is true. The article was written by Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois.

The article states:

It is time to let go of the two-state solution insanity and adopt the only solution that will bring true peace to the Middle East – a single Israeli state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Israel is the only country in the region dedicated to peace and the only power capable of stable, just and democratic government in the region.

This solution is the best one for everyone, especially the Palestinians. They will trade their two corrupt and inept governments and societies for a stable, free and prosperous one. Those Palestinians that wish to may leave their Fatah and Hamas-created slums and move to the original Palestinian state – Jordan. The British Mandate for Palestine created Jordan as the country for the Palestinians. It was the only justification for its creation. Even now, 75 percent of its population is of Palestinian descent. Those Palestinians that remain behind in Israel will maintain limited voting power, but will be awarded all the economic and civil rights of Israeli citizens. They will be free to raise a family, start a business and live in peace, all of which are impossible under Arab rule.

It is telling that Israel, despite being a ‘Jewish state,’ is the only country in the Middle East that allows Christians, Jews, and Muslims to live together without being discriminated against by the government.

If the goal is peace, Israel has to have the right to exist. The countries whose sole purpose is to destroy Israel need to be denied access to American foreign aid money and allowed to go bankrupt. The people in those countries need to have the opportunity to prosper–either in Israel or Jordan–not in a terrorist state with no purpose other than terrorism.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Are They Coming After My Cheeseburger Again ?

Posted on by
Basal sauropod silhouette Français : Silhouett...

Basal sauropod silhouette Français : Silhouette de sauropode basal (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Yesterday the U.K. Mail posted a story with the headline, “Did dinosaurs cause climate change? Huge creatures may have contributed to their own demise because they produced so much flatulence, say scientists .”

Maybe it’s just me, but that really seems like a bit of a stretch.

The article reports:

Professor Graeme Ruxton of St Andrews University, Scotland, said the giant animals spent 150 years emitting the potent global warming gas, methane.

Large plant-eating sauropods would have been the main culprits because of the huge amounts of greenery they consumed.

The team calculated the animals would have collectively produced more than 520m tons of methane a year – more than all today’s modern sources put together.

The article tells us that cows and other livestock currently only emit about 100m tons of methane a year. Will this argument eventually be used to convince all of us that eating beef is bad for the environment?

Enhanced by Zemanta

It Sounds Like A Good Idea– But It Just Doesn’t Work

Posted on by

Yesterday Michael Barone at the Washington Examiner posted an article about the recent dust-up about Elizabeth Warren‘s American Indian heritage. I live in Massachusetts and this story has been rather widely reported here.

The point of concern is not whether Elizabeth Warren is Native American or not–I really don’t care. The question is whether or not someone who may be 1/32 Native American can use that fact to be given special consideration when applying for education or employment opportunities.

The article notes:

Let’s assume the 1894 document is accurate. That makes Warren 1-32nd Native American. George Zimmerman, the Florida accused murderer, had a black grandmother. That makes him one-fourth black, four times as black as Warren is Indian, though the New York Times describes him as a “white Hispanic.”

What’s wrong with what Warren did? Capehart seems to understand that. “The implication in these stories is that Warren used minority status to advance her career,” he writes.

Well, yes. When she was hired, Harvard Law School had just denied tenure to a female teacher and was being criticized for not having enough minorities and women on its faculty.

Of course Harvard and Warren say her claim to minority status had nothing to do with her being hired. And if it did, no one is going to say so. Nothing to see here, just move on.

Quotas really don’t help anyone actually succeed–they may open a door for someone, but if a person is not academically qualified to take advantage of an opportunity, opening a door for that person does not help anyone–it simply puts an unqualified person in a position that a qualified person could fill. We need to remember the words of Martin Luther King, Jr., “A man should not be judged by his skin color but by the content of his character.” A person should be given opportunities based on his (or her) abilities, not race or sex. 

America has made some serious mistakes in the way certain groups of people have been treated. As Americans, we need to acknowledge that, stop doing it, and learn from our mistakes. We can’t redo the past, and discriminating against the majority of Americans will not change the past.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sometimes I Just Have An Attitude Problem

Posted on by

Yesterday’s New York Times reported on the antics of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed and the four other detainees being tried at Guantanamo as the planners of the September 11 terrorist attacks on America. Needless to say, the trial is a something of a circus because of the behavior of these five men. Al Qaeda and its related groups have very little respect for the American justice system (military or civilian), and play our courts and our media very well. I don’t have any other comments on the article, but I mention it because it leads to what I want to say.

Today’s New York Post posted a story by Gary Buiso explaining some of the details of how we eventually collected information from Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Just as America waterboards many of its military to prepare them for what will happen to them if they are taken prisoner by an enemy of America, Al Qaeda and related groups prepare their terrorists for what will happen to them if the Americans capture them (we used to capture them and send them somewhere for questioning–now we simply kill them with drones and cut off our source of information). The source of the story in The New York Post is a book titled “Hard Measures” by ex-CIA official José Rodriguez, Jr.

The article at the New York Post mentions Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s response to waterboarding. He had been coached on how it worked and how long it would last, and he simply counted on his fingers until it was over. Waterboarding alone would not have resulted in America getting the information we needed to understand the organization of Al Qaeda and eventually find Osama Bin Laden.

So what made Khalid Sheikh Mohammed talk–the experiencial equivalent of having a newborn baby in the house!

Ex-CIA official José Rodriguez Jr., told The Post:

The first day he was in custody, Mohammed — who attended college in Greensboro, NC — initially pretended to only speak Urdu, fooling no one. Officers forced him to stand, and after hours of questioning, his weakness for shut-eye began to show.

“Here’s the deal,” an interrogator said. “I know you speak English. I want you to politely ask me to let you go to sleep.”

The idea was to demonstrate to Mohammed “that he was no longer in control,” Rodriguez says. Officers would later keep him awake for 180 hours straight — 7 1/2 days. Loud noises and stress positions — where a detainee is shackled and forced to stand, putting intense pressure on the leg muscles — were used.

Other than the stress positions, that really does sound a lot like different stages of parenting. One of my daughters had a child who finally slept through the night after about a year. By the time that year was over, I think she and her husband would have given about anything for a good night sleep. As for loud noises, what do you say to parents who are raising a child who is a gifted drummer?

My point here is that there is a legal definition of torture–it does not include simply making someone uncomfortable.

The article reminds us:

One of Mohammed’s frequently stated goals was to be put on trial in civilian court in New York — which nearly happened until Congress last year blocked the Justice Department from transferring any Guantanamo Bay detainees to the United States.

“It seemed to us that he was looking for a platform from which he could spout his hatred for all things American, and a trial would certainly present that opportunity,” Rodriguez writes. “It strikes me as more than a little ironic that several years later, Attorney General Eric Holder almost granted KSM his wish.”

A civilian trial in New York would have been made into a circus with the antics of these five prisoners. Thank God it never happened.

There is one other comment in the New York Post article I would like to mention:

“More than one detainee expressed surprise when slapped, and told the interrogator, ‘Hey, you aren’t supposed to do that!’ The al Qaeda training manual told them that Americans would treat them with kid gloves!” Rodriguez writes.

We can’t win the war on terror wearing kid gloves. Even if we are not planning to use torture, it might be a good idea to let our enemies think we are. We are not dealing with nice people–we are dealing with people who cut off the heads of innocent people with dull knives and think it is fun. We need to remember that.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Pipeline That Won’t Die

Posted on by

The Keystone Pipeline is reviving itself again. Yesterday’s Washington Times reported that TransCanada, the company seeking to build the massive Canada-to-Texas Keystone XL pipeline reapplied for a permit on Friday. Here we go again.

The good news here is that TransCanada would rather sell its oil to America and send it through the Keystone Pipeline than sell its oil to China and build a pipeline to Canada’s west coast. The bad news is that if the Obama Administration delays the approval until after the 2012 election. the Keystone Pipeline may be moot–the pipeline across Canada may have already been started.

The article reports:

“Today there is just one person standing in the way of tens of thousands of new American jobs: President Obama,” said House Speaker John A. Boehner, Ohio Republican. “After nearly four years of review, delay and politics, he is out of excuses for blocking this job-creating energy project any longer. Every state along the proposed route supports the pipeline, and its builder has jumped through every bureaucratic hoop.”

Nebraska officials were split on the earlier pipeline route, but have reportedly come to an understanding over a new route to the east of the sensitive Ogalallah Aquifer.

The State Department, which has a role in the approval process because the pipeline would cross the U.S.-Canada border, said in a statement that it had received the application and would put it through “a rigorous, transparent and thorough review.”

The delay in the pipeline represents a division within the Democrat party–the environmentalists oppose the pipeline and the unions support it. If the President wants to collect money from both groups, he has to put off a decision until after the election. However, there is another theory. After the President has collected all the money he can from Hollywood (representing the environmentalists), he can go ahead and approve the pipeline in order to gain campaign donations from the unions. I am not sure I believe that because there is no danger of the unions supporting Republicans and the unions do tend to be financially involved in elections.

Approving the Keystone Pipeline would create jobs. If the people of Nebraska support the pipeline, it should be built.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Another Reason To Stop Funding The United Nations

Posted on by
Trails of Tears (English version)

Trails of Tears (English version) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Last time I checked, America was a sovereign country. We are not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but we are what we are. Well, the United Nations wants to make us better. The UK Guardian reported yesterday that the United Nations has stated that the United States should return the stolen land it took from the Indians. Now that could get very messy very quickly.

The article reports:

A United Nations investigator probing discrimination against Native Americans has called on the US government to return some of the land stolen from Indian tribes as a step toward combatting continuing and systemic racial discrimination.

James Anaya, the UN special rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, said no member of the US Congress would meet him as he investigated the part played by the government in the considerable difficulties faced by Indian tribes.

Anaya said that in nearly two weeks of visiting Indian reservations, indigenous communities in Alaska and Hawaii, and Native Americans now living in cities, he encountered people who suffered a history of dispossession of their lands and resources, the breakdown of their societies and “numerous instances of outright brutality, all grounded on racial discrimination”.

Man, there are a whole lot of connections made in those statements that I am just not seeing. I totally agree with what is being said about the horrible way we have treated the Indians. I just have a real problem with what is seen as the solution. We took land from the Indians and forced them on reservations. Would giving them back land have any impact on the way they live or their prosperity? There are specific instances where it might–In 1830, Andrew Jackson, the founder of the Democrat Party, signed the “Indian Removal Act of 1830.” The Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Muscogee-Creek, and Seminole Indians (known as the “Five Civilized Tribes”) had prospered, and President Jackson had ordered the Army to relocate them. Gold had been found on their land, and they were relocated. Is the gold still there? Is it accessible? How is the land currently being used? The answers to those questions would make an interesting addition to the discussion.

I am not sure anyone has a solution to righting the wrongs done to the American Indian. Giving them their land back really won’t change a whole lot. Giving them an education and helping them transition into the twenty-first century might, but how do you do that without destroying their culture? I will admit to being something of a pro-American snob–I think the American economic system with all its faults is better than any other economic system. I just don’t know how to enable the American Indians to take part in it successfully. I simply am not convinced that giving them back their land is the answer.

Just to be difficult, I also think the United Nations has more important things to worry about–people are being killed in Syria by their own government, Christians are being murdered in Nigeria, and there are some serious questions about human rights in China. Aren’t these things a little more pressing than whether or not to return land in America to the Indians?

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Like Pictures Better Than Raw Numbers

Posted on by

Yesterday Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted a story about the latest unemployment numbers (an unemployment rate of 8.1 percent). The story included the chart below.

I’m not an economist–I have enough trouble just keeping track of the family budget, but there are a few things I have figured out over the years. One of them is that you can make numbers say anything you want to say if you approach them correctly. What is happening with our unemployment numbers is not unique to the Obama Administration–it is a game that has been played by Washington politicians of all political stripes for a long time. In very simple terms, if there were no jobs in America–no one was working–but no one was looking for work, Washington would report the unemployment number as zero. Yes, you read that right. If you want to lower the unemployment number, all you have to do is not count the people who are not looking for work and the unemployment number automatically gets lower. It’s magic–no–it’s Washington sleight of hand. If you look at the chart above, you can see what has happened to the American labor force in the past ten years or so.

Last month The Hill reported that Representative Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) has introduced a one-page bill entitled the REAL Unemployment Calculation Act (H.R. 4128), which would require “the federal government [to] cite, as its official unemployment calculation, the figure that takes into account those who are no longer looking for work,” not only those individuals actively seeking jobs. According to Thomas.gov, the Library of Congress website, the latest action on that bill was 3/29/2012 Referred to House subcommittee. Status: Referred to the Subcommittee on Health, Employment, Labor, and Pensions.

I don’t know if there will ever be a convenient time to report honestly what the unemployment figures are. If you surf the Internet, you will find claims that the current real unemployment number is about 11 percent. It would be nice if accurate numbers were reported to Americans regardless of which political party is in charge.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Life Of Julia

Posted on by

The Life of Julia is the new campaign ad put out by the Obama campaign. I have watched it. I am not linking to it because it is garbage. If you want to watch it, google it. The basic premise of the ad is that the government helps Julia from a young age until old age and that will change if Mitt Romney is elected. The interesting parts of the video are the claims that Julia could lose whatever current benefit is being touted if Mitt Romney is elected and the Paul Ryan budget is passed–there are no actual facts here. It is also rather humorous that Julia will retire quite comfortably on her Social Security and receive quality healthcare under Obamacare and Medicare. There is no mention of the fact that all of these programs will be bankrupt in the near future unless changed.

The Life of Julia is aimed at an audience that wants the government involved in all aspects of its life. There is no mention of how much that costs. When Julia starts a small business, there is no mention of the over regulation on that business or the tax burden she faces if she is successful.

The Life of Julia is pure fiction. I just hope the American voters realize that.

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Hate To Pile On, But…

Posted on by

Elizabeth Warren is having a bad time right now. The facts have caught up with the dialogue. For a politician that is never a good thing (well, sometimes it is, if they are telling the truth!). I probably should mention at this point that I live in Massachusetts, will be voting for Scott Brown, and made a small donation to his campaign (considering the name of this website, that should not be a surprise).

In regard to the Indian claim, it really would have remained simply an item of family lore to have fun with if she hadn’t checked off a few boxes on her way to her current position. Every family has its urban legend–that’s part of the fun of being a family–but you are not supposed to try to advance your career by claiming whatever urban legend your family embraces.

Ms. Warren has a larger problem with truth and image in this campaign. On Tuesday, the Washington Examiner posted an article which included some of Ms. Warren’s employment history.

The article reports:

In addition to the story about Warren’s minority claims, the Boston Globe reported that Warren had a lucrative consulting job with Travelers Insurance in which she helped the company stop asbestos-related lawsuits, work that conflicts with her image as a consumer protection advocate who was once tapped to head the federal government’s newly created Consumer Protection Agency.

“I think the Native American story will pass,” University of Massachusetts political science professor Maurice Cunningham said. “But it’s a little hard to make the case you are purely for the consumer when you are working for Travelers Insurance.”

There are actually two disturbing things about the Travelers Insurance story. First, I understand that insurance companies (like any other business) are in business to make money, but that does not give them the right to try to squelch legitimate claims–if the asbestos-related lawsuits were legitimate and not over-the-top, there should have been no effort to stop them. If they were lawsuits where the lawyers made the money and the victims made little or nothing, they should have been stopped. (Tort reform, anyone?) Second, unless Ms. Warren can explain why she worked to stop the lawsuits, her credibility as a consumer advocate is about the same as her credibility as an Indian.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Stoughton Massachusetts – May 10th – 7:30 pm

Posted on by
 
 
Ahavath Torah Congregation’s

Hausman Memorial Lecture Free Speech Series

presents

Is it really as bad as it looks?
Israel at 64, A non-sensationalist look at Israel’s current state of affairs
 
a talk by
Herb Keinon,
Senior Foreign Affairs Correspondent for The Jerusalem Post
 

Thursday, May 10, 7:30 PM


$10 suggested donation

Bring your electric bill and sign up for Just Energy by Momentis and come as our guest.

Herb Keinon has been at the JPost for the last 25 years. He took over the diplomatic beat in August 2000, just after the failed Camp David summit and just before the outbreak of the Palestinian violence in September of that year.
 
Keinon is responsible for covering the prime minister and the foreign minister, often traveling with the Prime Minister on his trips abroad. He has followed Ehud Barak to Paris, Ariel Sharon to Crawford, Texas, Ehud Olmert to Annapolis, and Binyamin Netanyahu to Washington. As such, Keinon has up-close knowledge and an intimate perspective of the country’s political, diplomatic and strategic challenges – from Hamas to Hizbullah, Kadima to Likud. Keinon also writes a popular monthly “light” column on the trials and tribulations of life in Israel. During his years at the Post, Keinon has covered a wide variety of different beats, including Jerusalem, immigration and absorption, religious parties, the ultra-Orthodox, and the settlements. He has also been a features writer at the paper.
 
Keinon has lectured widely in Israel, the US, Europe and Australia on the political and diplomatic situation in Israel, and appears on a variety of radio and television programs around the world as a guest commentator on the subject. Keinon wrote a book published in 2009 and translated into Hebrew this year, Lone Soldiers: Israel’s Defenders from Around the World, which tells the tale of young men and women from the Diaspora who volunteer to serve in the Israeli army.
 
Originally from Denver, Keinon has a BA in political science from the University of Colorado, Boulder, and an MA in journalism from the University of Illinois, Champaign-Urbana. He has lived in Israel for 28 years, is married with four children, and resides in Ma’ale Adumim, just outside of Jerusalem.
 
Co-sponsored by Christians and Jews United for Israel, Rabbis and Ministers for Israel, ACT NH, ACT Framingham
 
Enhanced by Zemanta

How Americans Are Misled By The Dominant Media

Posted on by

The American Thinker posted an article today detailing how the dominant media manipulated the American public in its reporting of the killing of Trayvon Martin. The article gives a very specific and detailed account of the techniques used–I strongly suggest that you follow the link and read the entire article, although I will try to sum it up here.

The article cites the basic narrative:

The Trayvon narrative can be summarized as follows: a black child was walking innocently through a gated community after buying some candy at a store, when a white racist stalked and murdered him for no reason but his color.  The police, who are also racists, let the white man go free.

This narrative is similar to those used in previous racial disinformation campaigns:

  • 1987 – White racists have raped a young black girl and left her in a trash bag.
  • 1996 – White racists are burning down black churches across the South.
  • 2005 – White racists at Duke University have raped a black woman.

Like the Trayvon narrative, the earlier narratives were untrue.  However, they remain widely believed as a result of the massive media coverage used to bring them to national attention.

The article also points out that in the news coverage of the events in Florida Trayvon Martin was referred to as Trayvon and George Zimmerman was referred to simply as Zimmerman. The article also points out that when the media reported that Trayvon Martin was killed in a gated community, readers (and listeners) were left with the impression that it was an upper class white neighborhood, when in truth it was a mixed-race middle class community. The words you use to describe something as basic as a neighborhood can add a whole other dimension to a story. That is what was done here.

Creating unnecessary racial tension is not smart. People who are neighbors are quite capable of living in peace if allowed to do so. The kind of reporting we have seen in the death of Trayvon Martin is not helpful to anyone.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

How Did We Get Here ?

Posted on by

Today’s Washington Times posted a story about the current situation regarding the NATO missile defense sites in Eastern Europe that are supposed to be set up. These sites are supposed to be the subject of the recent open microphone remark by President Obama to Russian President Medvedev that President Obama would be able to be much more flexible in his second term. Well, evidently President Obama’s promise of flexibility in the future didn’t really impress the Russians.

The article in the Washington Times reports:

Russia’s most senior military officer (Russian Chief of General Staff Nikolai Makarov) said Thursday that Moscow would strike and destroy NATO missile defense sites in Eastern Europe before they came online if the U.S. pushes ahead with deployment.

“A decision to use destructive force pre-emptively will be taken if the situation worsens,” Russian Chief of General Staff Nikolai Makarov said at an international missile defense conference in Moscow attended by senior U.S. and NATO officials.

How did America get to a place where we are being overtly threatened by the Russians?

The article concludes:

Russian officials insist that the system has the capability to shoot down their ICBMs, thus robbing their nuclear deterrent of its credibility and destabilizing the Cold War-era balance of mutually assured destruction.

Neither the State Department nor the Pentagon had any immediate comment on the Russian threat Thursday.

I need to point out here that the missile defense system in question is a missile defense system–no one is saying anything about offensive weapons (except the Russians). How did we get to a place where the Russians can tell us whether or not we can place defensive missiles in Europe?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Free Speech ?

Posted on by

There have been a few instances in recent years that have called into question whether or not we have a First Amendment. Two recent examples are the four people charged with disorderly conduct because they were handing out copies of the Gospel of John outside an Arab cultural festival.(see rightwinggranny.com) and General Boykin being denied the right to speak at West Point because of his stand against Islamic terror (see rightwinggranny.com). The latest violation of the First Amendment by those who should be supporting it occurred near Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Yesterday the Insurance Journal reported that the Thomas More Law Center has filed a civil suit against Allegan Michigan officials and the leaders of a Muslim civil rights organization that asked the city to cancel the event.

The article reports:

According to the suit, a speech given Jan. 28 by Kamal Saleem at Allegan High School was stopped by police acting on a letter opposing Saleem’s visit. The letter was sent several days earlier by Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The suit also said that police were told of possible _ and unconfirmed _ threats against Saleem, said Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel for the Ann Arbor-based Thomas More center. Thompson said shutting down the meeting violated Saleem’s right to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel for the Ann Arbor-based Thomas More center, commented, “The irony is this event was held to extol the virtues of the U.S. Constitution. In the middle, you have the police coming in and shutting it down. The audience is shouting ‘What about free speech?’ ”

Dawud Walid, executive director of the Michigan branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), stated, “We believe he is a bogus ex-terrorist. I’m saying he’s a total fraud. If they want to sue me, then sue me for defamation of character. We view this lawsuit as a nuisance and form of trying to drain advocacy organizations of their resources. Advocacy organizations have freedom of speech to raise concerns about people who propagate divisive messages in the community.”

We need to understand that CAIR was in unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation Case–they have an agenda. Their goal is to use the American legal system to undermine the rights of Americans and destroy the US Constitution so that it can be replaced with Sharia Law. If that sounds wild to you, please google the Holy Land Foundation Case and read the plans for destroying the American legal system. Those plans are included in the case documents and are available to the public.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Disquieting News From The Middle East

Posted on by

Breitbart is reporting tonight that the Israeli government has called up six reserve battalions because of increasing danger on its Egyptian and Syrian borders. Since the revolution in Egypt, the Sinai has been used as a point of origin for terrorist attacks, and the continuing unrest in Syria also has the potential of spilling over into Israel.

The article concludes:

Al Qaeda terrorists have reportedly moved into Syria to destabilize the situation even further. Thousands of Al Qaeda members have come into Syria from the north, among whom are Saudis, Egyptians, Lebanese, Palestinians, Iraqis and Sudanese. On Monday, April 30, the Al Qaeda groups set a series of bombs in Damascus, after an Al Qaeda terrorist blew himself up along with 9 worshipper in a Damascus mosque two days earlier.

 With the Muslim Brotherhood in charge in Egypt and al Qaeda in Syria, Israel is surrounded.  And with Iran rapidly approaching nuclear status, can Israel afford to depend on the United States for help as long as Barack Obama and his anti-Israel animus remain in office?

 Israeli reserves are necessary because the seething cauldron of the Arab Spring, nurtured by its champion in the Oval Office, may soon boil over.

The Obama Administration totally misunderstood the direction of the Arab Spring, and that mistake is about to become very obvious. The Arab Spring was not about democracy–it was taken over by the Muslim Brotherhood with the goal of establishing a Muslim Caliphate and eliminating Israel. Backed by Iran (soon to go nuclear), the Arab Spring is about to take the next step in that direction. Last year was the year the dictators fell. This year will be the year when the royal families are undermined and possibly removed from power.

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Guarding The Existence Of Your Local Garage

Posted on by

There was a time back in the age of dinosaurs when car repairs were not that complicated–a good mechanic had the equipment and the knowledge to fix pretty much anything that went wrong with your car. A good mechanic is still worth his weight in gold, but in Massachusetts, he does not always have access to all the information and computer applications he needs to do his job.

A website called massrighttorepair explains a propsed law that would solve this problem. The website states:

Demand your right to repair your car where you want. “Right to Repair” legislation would give every mechanic access to the same information and tools that dealers have access to, so you can get your car serviced where you want to, and save hundreds of dollars.

No longer will independent technicians need to purchase expensive tools and software for cars they service only a few times a year. Instead, car owners and independent technicians will have up-to-date access to repair and diagnostic information for all makes and models of vehicles on the road using a universal interface system. The system would be accessible to anyone for a daily, weekly, monthly or yearly subscription. It’s as easy as downloading an app on your smartphone.

Cost savings for repairs can be passed along to consumers. Right to Repair will ensure that consumers always have a choice in where to service their vehicles. And when consumers choose independent repair shops over the big dealerships, they can save an average of $300-$500 each year.

More than 106,000 Massachusetts citizens have supported Right to Repair by signing the Right to Repair initiative petition for a 2012 ballot question. But the legislature can act now so we won’t have to wait that long. Tell your legislator to stand up for independent, small businesses, instead of big out-of-state corporations.

The website explains how the bill would work and how to get involved. Please follow the link above if you would like to cut the cost of repairing your car.

 

When Common Sense Takes A Vacation

Posted on by
Flanders Field American Cemetery and Memorial,...

Flanders Field American Cemetery and Memorial, Waregem, Belgium (1937), Jacques Gréber, landscape architect. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

There were two stories in the Providence Journal last week (Cross on Woonsocket city property called unconstitutional and Former RI National Guard top official plans rally for Woonsocket cross memorial) highlighting an important local dispute. The stories deal with a Wisconsin group that has sent a letter of complaint to the Mayor of Woonsocket about a war memorial at the Woonsocket Fire Department. The memorial dates back to 1921 and was put there originally to honor those who died defending America’s freedom in World War I. The monument is in the shape of a cross, and the complaint claims that that it is an illegal display of a religious symbol on city property.

Today at 4:30 there will be a rally at the Woonsocket Fire Station in support of the monument. The rally was organized by Lt. Gen. Reginald Centracchio, state adjutant general for 10 years.

The group protesting the cross claims that their involvement is the result of a complaint by a resident of Woonsocket.

This is ridiculous–the monument has been standing for almost a hundred years. Crosses are a traditional way of honoring the dead–they are a cultural symbol as well as a religious symbol. I am sorry if someone is offended by this cross, but there is nothing in the US Constitution that protects Americans from being offended. Is Flanders Field going to be illegal soon (even though it is in France, it honors American veterans)?

Enhanced by Zemanta

When The Stories Just Don’t Agree

Posted on by

On April 30th, Marc Thiessen posted an article in the Washington Post about some statements in former CIA counterterrorism chief Jose Rodriguez’s new book. Mr. Rodriguez is doing the talk show circuit to publicize his book about his days at the CIA. In the book Mr. Rodriguez recounts events showing that then Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi lied when she stated that she was not aware that waterboarding was used on captured terrorists.

The artice states:

In his new book, “Hard Measures,” Rodriguez reveals that he led a CIA briefing of Pelosi, where the techniques being used in the interrogation of senior al-Qaeda facilitator Abu Zubaida were described in detail. Her claim that she was not told about waterboarding at that briefing, he writes, “is untrue.”

“We explained that as a result of the techniques, Abu Zubaydah was compliant and providing good intelligence. We made crystal clear that authorized techniques, including waterboarding, had by then been used on Zubaydah.” Rodriguez writes that he told Pelosi everything, adding, “We held back nothing.”

Why is this important? A few years ago David Limbaugh wrote a book called, BANKRUPT, The Intellectual and Moral Bankruptcy of Today’s Democratic Party. The book details the recent history of the Democrat Party playing politics with important matters of national security. I strongly recommend it, although it did make me very angry.

Because the reports of the briefing of Speaker Pelosi including the information in question remain classified, there is no way of confirming either Ms. Pelosi’s or Mr. Rodriguez’s story. It would help all Americans if those documents were de-classified.